Talk:Main Page

Jiralhanae Civil War
Should there be a page on the armed conflict between the Jiralhanae that took place before they joined the Covenant?--光环的家伙 (H1234-NET) 14:16, 8 October 2011 (EDT)


 * I'm not sure; virtually all we know about this war is that the Jiralhanae were heavily scarred, technology-wise. It probably wasn't a civil war, either - the species was culturally divided into clan-based systems, even into their service under the Covenant.--  Fore  run  ner '' 15:49, 8 October 2011 (EDT)


 * In Stomping on the Heels of a Fuss, the Jiralhanae continuously refer to it as "the great civil war" (p62 and 63). "Civil war" in this context may have a broader meaning, referring to a civil war amongst their entire species or civilization, as opposed to one within a single nation. Within the Covenant, species and culture are largely synonymous, as evidenced by the fact the names of Covenant species are capitalized without exception, while "human" isn't. Despite the fact the Jiralhanae tribes have differences, it's rather easy to find enough unifying similarities to group them as a single civilization. In addition, it's not entirely impossible the Jiralhanae had a united government of some kind before the war and the current tribal system is a result of regression caused by the war, much like most post-apocalyptic fiction deals with the collapse of human civilization and the re-emergence of smaller, tribal societies.--Jugus (Talk  | Contribs ) 08:44, 20 October 2011 (EDT)


 * Considering their entire species was until recently united together in an empire. I suppose you could consider it like the 1948 war between Israel and Palestine - the two were one nation that plunged into a civil war, with Israel seceeding. The US civil war was between the United States and the territories that had recently seceeded from them. So, a civil war isn't just defined by "one nation goes to war with itself"; it can include warfare with territory recently seceeded from them.--  Fore  run  ner '' 14:40, 20 October 2011 (EDT)

Landing page update 2011
So, what do you think? :) — subtank  15:15, 18 October 2011 (EDT)


 * A Bit of reformatting is necassary, but its definitely better than the clusterf*ck that was the old page. User:Infernal-Blaze


 * Mind taking a screenshot? :) — subtank  15:58, 18 October 2011 (EDT)

Thanks for using the logo I made. It's really cool to see it on the front page!--Soul reaper 21:27, 18 October 2011 (EDT)

Well I like it. Now we just need that background... pestilence  Phil,  pestilence!  21:33, 18 October 2011 (EDT)

I kinda miss the pictures. Also the real world button isn't very good.--Ben Traeger is King 22:21, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
 * What if we changed the Real World button to an image of Mister Chief? :D pestilence   Phil,  pestilence! 
 * Create a good image and we'll see. :) — subtank  09:47, 19 October 2011 (EDT)

Usage of the New Content template
I've noticed that people often tend to remove the New Content template the moment the "new content" comes out, without updating the page with the said new content. To me, this seems counterproductive; it negates the whole purpose of the template, which is to point out the page needs to be updated. It seems more appropriate to remove the template only after the content's some months old or already updated; otherwise there isn't much point to it in the first place. We could immediately replace it with Template:Outofdate, but that doesn't make much sense either, given the content is still very new. I think the New Content template should be kept in articles for a certain amount of time, perhaps two months, after which it would be replaced by the out of date template if the content hasn't been updated by that point. --Jugus (Talk  | Contribs ) 13:43, 26 October 2011 (EDT)

I agree, 2 months seems like a fair amount of time. Col.  Snipes  4  50  14:09, 26 October 2011 (EDT)

Possible Sangheili Civil War article
Throughout Halo: Glasslands, there are multiple instances of a split between the Sangheili race, namely those loyal to the Arbiter and those loyal to the Servants of Abiding Truth. Near the end of the book the pilot escorting Phillips notes there has been armed conflict between the keeps on Sanghelios, does anyone else think there should be at least a brief article on this? Col.  Snipes  4  50  12:16, 31 October 2011 (EDT)

Up to date
I'm just curious how up to date we are on Glasslands info. I don't have the book yet and am unwilling to read spoilers, so I can't really check. pestilence  Phil,  pestilence!  21:14, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

Not at all. I've just finished reading the 10000 unread Halopedia emails that I wouldn't read before I finished the book, and we're not up to date AT ALL. Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )  21:29, 5 November 2011 (EDT)!
 * Alright, well since you're on the ball, the first thing you should do is complete the synopsis on the Halo: Glasslands page. Which is a very big project. However, that'll lay the foundation for everything else. Then we need to do the pages main characters and plot points. I should be able to get my copy and help you out some time this week. pestilence   Phil,  pestilence!  23:18, 5 November 2011 (EDT)

You know that the book is over 400 pages long? So when you get it is not when you'll be able to edit it. So whenever you get it add a week or so to it and then you might be able to edit. Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )  00:43, 6 November 2011 (EDT)

Hey, do we have a page for Infinity yet? Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )  15:27, 6 November 2011 (EST)

Spoilers
We should've talked about this earlier, but what is the spoiler policy for Anniversary? Spoilers have been posted on the terminals page. pestilence  Phil,  pestilence!  10:23, 13 November 2011 (EST)


 * I wasn't aware that the spoiler policy covered expanded universe plot. I take it someone leaked the game again; was it France (that's at least three times, already)?--  Fore  run  ner '' 10:49, 13 November 2011 (EST)

Remove them. We didn't put the videos of Noble Team dying before the game came out, even though we knew they were legit. Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )  11:04, 13 November 2011 (EST)!


 * I accidentally read those summaries, and they are spoiling. I think we should put up a Spoiler warning on these new contents. (Removing them seems a bit harsh, we will use them eventually) If it's France again, they must be doing this deliberately, or they just have no sense of time. — S331 Bubbleshieldhud.svg(The anti-social contributor who talks too little.) 11:07, 13 November 2011 (EST)

We should remove them, and then put them back up after the game comes out. That's how we've always done this. Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )  11:09, 13 November 2011 (EST)


 * You're taking a very drastic approach, and we haven't "always" done this. Remember that this is the re-release of a game that includes some expanded universe stuff that talk about the Forerunner trilogy. It's not a spoiler; it's advertisement for an upcoming book. The only way you'll be spoiled is if you hadn't read Cryptum or ever been spoiled with Forerunner trilogy stuff over the year. When Halo: Reach came out, it was a new storyline and there were too many complaints about being spoiled across the internet; that was why we tried to slow down spoiling. Even then, we only restricted Campaign, despite the Firefight and Multiplayer maps being based on Campaign (and therefore revealing to us the massive, underground Forerunner structure). When Halo 3: ODST was leaked, we did the same - it was a completely-new story that had been leaked, and thousands of people who had pre-ordered the game were being spoiled and complained. Halo: The Cole Protocol was also distributed early; no one gave a rat's ass because it was expanded-universe stuff. Summarising: the terminals aren't part of the Halo: Combat Evolved storyline, and so people who pre-ordered CEA won't be spoiled about, say, who dies in the end... because we already know what happens in that game. The only people who will be spoiled would be the people who didn't read Halo: Cryptum. The end.--  Fore  run  ner '' 11:27, 13 November 2011 (EST)


 * What he said. The terminals aren't part of the game's primary story and besides, they don't even include any particularly dramatic or plot-changing reveals (unlike the pre-Reach spoilers about the team members' deaths, for example), so I'd say having the summaries on the page a couple of days early isn't really a problem. --Jugus (Talk  | Contribs ) 12:16, 13 November 2011 (EST)

What are you talking about? From the beginning, we knew the end... Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )  12:31, 13 November 2011 (EST)!

So how about pictures? I just happened to screenshot some images from the Halo: Anniversary terminals. Would it be acceptable to upload them and possibly insert them into some articles?-- Brute Honour Guard  ( "Talk" ) 12:58, 13 November 2011 (EST)


 * I take it from Youtube again? :P
 * Hold it off until the game is released. :) — subtank  13:13, 13 November 2011 (EST)


 * I'm afraid so. Though thankfully, the video I found is in high quality. Still, if they do not fit what is deemed as a Halopedia's quality standards, I can attempt to find a better source. I plan on buying a capture card soon, anyway.-- Brute Honour Guard [[Image:Bruteface.png|20px]] ( "Talk" ) 18:10, 13 November 2011 (EST)

Having watched one of the videos (to find out if it was valid or not), I would have to disagree. They are spoilers. It introduced a new character and a completely new sub-plot. Obviously, I won't be watching any more until I get my hands on the game myself, but I think the way we are using the Hide Spoilers template now is sufficient enough. pestilence  Phil,  pestilence!  13:42, 13 November 2011 (EST)


 * I haven't seen too much right now, but I'm only seeing it as an advertisement for the next Greg Bear book; a lot of the Forerunner stuff we learn now are things that will probably appear when the novel comes out.--  Fore  run  ner '' 14:20, 13 November 2011 (EST)