Talk:343 Guilty Spark

Spark's Rampancy
Do we have anything solid that states 343 as being rampant? To my observation everything he did was within a degree of protocol. Even in Halo 2, he didn't "help" put the ring in Standby Mode, he was simply inactive. It wasn't his ring, protocol would dictate that he should not interface with its systems. Thoughts?Ocean Soul 18:41, 3 September 2011 (EDT)


 * The red light only flashes when he is in defencive mode - either protecting a reclaimer or the control room. At no point did he go against protocol; he even turned on his allies because of it. Because of that we should not say that he is rampant, and the red light setting should not be regarded as evidence of otherwise.--  Fore  run  ner '' 19:09, 3 September 2011 (EDT)


 * Cryptum all but outright states that Guilty Spark was not rampant. The monitors of the Halos that Mendicant Bias had captured attacked their Forerunner creators when the order was given to destroy the Halos. Monitors are programmed to defend against any attack, regardless of its source. --Courage never dies. 19:17, 3 September 2011 (EDT)


 * Good to see I'm not the only one who thinks that he was not rampant. Ocean Soul 20:42, 3 September 2011 (EDT)


 * I've been thinking about this for some time, and I agree. However, Johnson's entry in the Essential Visual Guide states Guilty Spark was rampant, so I'm not exactly sure what to make of it.--Jugus (Talk  | Contribs ) 09:10, 4 September 2011 (EDT)
 * Maybe Spark was programmed to respond in a slightly nicer way, instead of (trying to) outright killing them. pestilence   Phil,  pestilence!  10:16, 4 September 2011 (EDT)

A quote that I made from a really long time ago: '"343 Guilty Spark is the Monitor of Installation 04 and was created by the Forerunners! After the Forerunners were assaulted by the Flood they created the Halo Array to destroy the Flood. The Forerunners set up Monitors to oversee the Halo Installations and to control Sentinels incase of a Flood out brake. To insure that the Halo's wouldn't be destroyed very easily is that they only provided the Monitors with enough information to maintain the Halo installations. And if they were to fall into the hands of the Gravemind they would not have the location of the other installations. And to help these Monitors if they fell into the Gravemind they were programed to stop the Flood at all costs. And they also had a protocol that stated that if even a tiny wire on the ring got a tiny bit damaged the Monitor was to send at least 12 Constructors to examine, repair, see what caused the problem, send it back to a more intelligent computer, then that computer must type an at least 1,000 page report on it, then send that to a higher up Computer, then that computer analyzes it and fixes errors adds things and so forth, then it gets sent to a higher computer, then a higher one, then it gets sent to the Monitor of that Installation. The Monitor then examines it, then right a "simple" program about it(this simple program is so advanced it would take 500 normal computers to barely process it). It then sends it out to the Sentinel Constructor Factories to implement in all future Sentinels so they would know about this. The Monitor also sends all knowledge of this incident to the Knowing. They would also destroy every Flood Spore in an area. And if they didn't account for every microscopic Flood Spore then that whole area was destroyed. And another thing as I said above is that the Halo rings must be at perfect condition at all times in case of a Flood out brake. And the Monitor will do anything to make sure that the ring is always ready to fire. One particular example accord on Installation 04b when Avery Junior Johnson attempted to activate a partially constructed Halo. The Monitor of that Installation 343 Guilty Spark witnessed this. And 343 Guilty Spark couldn't let this happen. Because 343 Guilty Spark knew that it could destroy the Ark and then there would be nothing to make large-scale repairments to the Installations. And that would go against protocol and eventually all the Installations will need large-scale repaiments and there would be nothing to make the replacements! And then if there was a Flood out-brake the whole UNIVERSE could become consumed! So in order to preserve the Ark and the whole Universe 343 Guilty Spark attacked Avery Junior Johnson and successfully stopped this threat that could destroy the whole Universe and put his makers to shame. Unfortunately, soon afterwards, 343 Guilty was "deactivated". The Ring was forced to fire and the Ring was torn apart. The current status of the Ark is unknown, there is a 100% chance that the ring is severely damaged."' Vegerot goes RAWR!  Vegerot  ( talk )  13:11, 4 September 2011 (EDT)

Helooo? What happened to this conversation, it was pretty good, then just suddenly ended. Is it because you all agree with my point or what? Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )  22:20, 5 September 2011 (EDT)


 * Well, after reading it over, I'm not sure where to stand on it. Are you in agreement that 343 Guilty Spark was not rampant? The paragraph/wall made it seem so. That being said, I don't think the protocol was quite as "corporate" as you put it. Any damages would be seen to by the environmental and mechanical Sentinels. The Monitors were in charge of overseeing that everything went smoothly, and to oversee the activation of the ring. The other sentinels didn't "report" to them, they were programmed to their tasks. Ocean Soul 00:18, 6 September 2011 (EDT)

That was actually an excerpt from something I wrote on Fanon, but if you disregard that stuff, then you should see my point. My whole idea when writing this was that I wouldn't make it biased towards anything, just a neutral view. But yes, I did imply that he was not rampant, just trying to protect the Ark. Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )

So what did you think about the hardcore facts that I presented (mainly the last couple sentences if you don't feel like reading the whole thing). Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )  14:36, 11 September 2011 (EDT)!


 * They're fairly well-known facts, not much to think of them. According to Forerunner Installation Protocol, Humanity was - yet again - in the wrong several times. Activating the rings early would destroy the ring, and waiting a few days would only allow the Flood to regather in a likely contained manner due to the Sentinels. It wouldn't get as bad because 343 was more attentive than 2401, who let his ring go to hell. The UNSC didn't really know this, and figure the Flood needed to be dealt with now.Ocean Soul 14:40, 11 September 2011 (EDT)

Yeah. But yes or no. Do you you think 343 Guilty Spark was right to kill Avery Junior Johnson and try to murder John-117? I think yes. Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )  14:59, 11 September 2011 (EDT)!!


 * All things considered, yes. 343 Guilty Spark was well within the protocol outline for defense of his Installation. Ocean Soul 15:02, 11 September 2011 (EDT)


 * I agree -343GS did what he thought was right. I suppose his drastic countermeasures would be thought of as rampancy to the UNSC, whose AIs are designed not to harm humans. However, we must remember that he is an armed, military AI who follows orders to the letter. If it says "kill potential threats," he damn well does his duty.--  Fore  run  ner '' 16:16, 11 September 2011 (EDT)

Era dispute
Should the post-war era be included in the era template? If the time after the events of the level The Covenant count as post-war, then I understand, but given the fact that the war between Humanity and the Covenant Separatists and Loyalists went on for over ten years after Truth's death, it shouldn't. --


 * It's post-Human-Covenant War.--  Fore  run  ner '' 19:13, 3 September 2011 (EDT)

Monitor of Installation 04 and its replacement.
Are we sure about this, I mean we know that he was for the original installation but are we sure that he was for the replacement as well?--210.56.81.228 01:40, 28 July 2011 (EDT)


 * Fairly certain, yes. That was Installation 04. We simply call it 04b for simplicity. My theory is that Spark retreated to the Gas Mine to await the arrival of the replacement Installation 04. Ocean Soul 00:30, 6 September 2011 (EDT)

Halo Anniversary
Are we putting the people in Halo: Combat Evolved also in Halo: Anniversary? I don't know why, but that just seems kinda weird. Maybe that's just from 4 hours of sleep, idk. Vegerot ( talk )  03:21, 28 July 2011 (EDT)!


 * Halo Anniversary is a port of the original game with a graphic enhancement (not a remake - remakes are re-made); I don't think it's necessary. Then again, we also have articles like Halo 2 Vista.--  Fore  run  ner '' 05:54, 28 July 2011 (EDT)


 * I agree it's unnecessary to add Anniversary to appearances sections - basically, if it's in the original game, you know it's in Anniversary and the other way around. --Jugus (Talk  | Contribs ) 06:00, 28 July 2011 (EDT)


 * I know I'm just an annon but hear me out, I think Anniversary should be in the appearances section based on the new terminals. The teaser trailer showed several monitors which means that new characters are being introduced and their only appearance will be Anniversary for now. Maybe we should just add it for the new characters but it is something to consider--210.56.81.17 07:52, 28 July 2011 (EDT)

The Chakas Monitor and Guilty Spark
This article and Chakas's need to be updated. 343GS is not the original Chakas, but a duplicate, a fragment. This is made very clear in Primordium with the Monitor making a distinction between itself and Spark, and Spark referring to himself as a fragment in the Anniversary Terminals.

Error in "Intermediate period"
"However, over time, Spark observed one or more spacefaring species visit and explore Installation 04. These species recorded their findings and eventually left without breaching containment."

In Intermediate period there are these two sentences. But in the source cited (343 Guilty Spark's Log) the facts are recounted in a different way. That is, the Covenant arrived on the ring and shortly after they accidentally released the Flood. Where is written that are landed more species? Where is written that these have gone away without breaking containment? --Xwx 09:42, 31 July 2012 (EDT)
 * Based on this sentence: "A primitive, hegemonizing swarm calling itself The Covenant has landed on installation 4. Apparently seeking something specific. Exploring! Meddling! I've seen it all before . They'll record what they see and they'll leave." The underlined seems to imply that Spark has observed other spacefaring species (presumably deemed as not-threatening to the ring by Spark) visiting the ring and leaving after they're done documenting the ring prior to the Covenant's arrival.— subtank   10:11, 31 July 2012 (EDT)


 * I'm sorry, I'd missed that line :( Thanks for the help. Xwx 19:06, 31 July 2012 (EDT)

The "04"
Now that Primordium has established that the Guilty Spark from the games wasn't the only instance of the AI and there was at least one more fragment elsewhere, one can infer the "04" in his designation is referring to Installation 04. If we want to describe the AI in general rather than just the extension assigned to Installation 04, it seems more appropriate to drop the "04" from the title, even if it does seem that was his "primary" instance. Not to mention the fact he's most commonly known as "343 Guilty Spark" anyway. --Jugus (Talk  | Contribs ) 12:14, 3 September 2012 (EDT)


 * A fair point. To be honest I've always been a little uncomfortable with the "04" designation anyway, since the vast majority of sources have only ever referred to the AI as 343 Guilty Spark.--Emblem 1.jpg  Rusty  -  112  13:04, 3 September 2012 (EDT)

Totally agreed. And virtually all of the links to his page are "343 Guilty Spark" anyway. Tuckerscreator (stalk ) 13:34, 3 September 2012 (EDT)

Agreed, per the above users.-- 16:37, 3 September 2012 (EDT)

Agreed as per everyone else.-- Spartacus,   Halopedia Administrator  Talk 19:01, 3 September 2012 (EDT)

New infobox image
Could we replace the infobox image with this? It is more updated, nicer, and depicts Spark the way 343i has been depicting monitors. - NightHammer (talk) 00:28, 23 November 2014 (EST)