User talk:Manticore

Template:Ranks
thanks for your modifications, man, and welcome to Halopedia!

over and out.

cheers,

RelentlessRecusant 17:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

ranks
many thanks for your dedicated work on rank articles...your familiarity utterly uber-owns my own...;D =D

Cheers,

RelentlessRecusant 16:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Stop your Excessive Editing
You tend to make the rank pages look smaller, you should try a keep most of the info from before you change them completlely, combind with your new stuff they could look really good so keep the info and add the stuff you add except if you stat whats already there in different words. And how come every time you change the rank pages that there talk pages are gone? Signed the maker of all but 4-6 of the rank pages-- ryan  n  green '' day 20:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe when he moves the pages he isn't moving the Talk pages, pagan fool. -- Fist of Rukt 08:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Ryan on this one. Though your edits do tend to make some sense, they also shorten already short articles. Also, the Halo novels almost always refer to LTJG as lieutenant junior grade, lacking the comma you added. Because of this, I'm going to move the page back to lieutenant junior grade, but I'll leave the comma in the addresses (though I'm removing the shot you took at the original maker of the article).
 * --RotBrandon 00:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your input everyone. I have no problem with people editing everything I added, I was just trying to make the articles clearer and more standardised. Most of the information I removed was suplemented by the ranks template I added (such as LTJG lying between Ensign and LT) or seemed to be mere fan fiction. Hope I haven't offended anyone. Manticore 09:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and in regards to the comma in Lieutenant, Junior Grade - that was based on that being the title for the U.S. Navy rank, which Halo seems to adapt. I know that in the books the comma was omitted but in all the ranks follow the U.S. scheme. No big deal either way in my opinion. Manticore 09:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This is exactly why all Ranks not mentioned in the Halo Universe should be erased! New users, like Manticore, are going to think that its OK to add Realworld articles about ranks for Halopedia!   We need to stop this before it gets out of hand!  Soon people are going start adding what present day troop numbers are in platoons and Battalions!   Battalions have changed what like three times since World War II and then to claim that they won't change in the next 500 years its ridiculous!  Only what is mentioned in the Halo Universe should be allowed in Halopedia!-- Yamanba 10:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with what you're saying about troop numbers Yamanba, which is exactly why I didn't include any of that sort of information, and was planning to remove it from Marine Rank pages once I got to them. I have read the letter to Eric Nylund though, which states he uses the current U.S. ranking system, probably why the articles of ranks yet to be mentioned remain. I think that keeping these pages is appropriate, otherwise users who come here searching for rank information would only be subjected to a fractured rank structure, which would likely cause confusion. How can we just say Admiral is superior to Ensign? One without knowledge of U.S. ranks might assume that ensign immediately follows admiral in the rank structure. And my creation of crewman recruit/apprentice articles was merely to show a naval equivalent to Marine ranks, though I do understand the argument for deleting them. Manticore 10:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

captain (navy)
H:FoR states what a captains badge looks like and that was not it, kk mate cheers, J!MMY8806 15:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

were commander keyes gets promoted after he defeats the 4 invading covenant ships over sigma octanus 4 on page 161, kk, cheers mate, J!MMY8806 15:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

the only thing i have wrong with it is that it may of changed bieng in the future, and as well we should only post what is for certain and we havnt really seen any sign of this, kk cheers, J!MMY8806 17:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

ye ok no prob mate, cheers J!MMY8806 17:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

recognition
Continue the beautiful work.

Cheers,

TRU7H 17:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * no problem, man. it's just a sincere recognization of people's work...because I often find users in these bubble shells, doing terrific stuff, but no one sees that they're doing! Cheers, TRU7H 18:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Just taking the opportunity to do a little bragging LOL. This award was given on my fifth day of membership. I had 500 edits by my sixth day of membership. Also I created this pretty funky signature on my sixth day. --  Manticore  TalkundefinedCSV 13:37, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

RE:Letter - Re:Polaski
It is entirely possible. However, he may have meant her to be a PO2 and ended up refering to her as a WO1 because he had called her a Petty Warrant Officer earlier. I'll look through the book and present this to him. My main point was to remove Petty from Warrant Officer, as that would contradict the American system that I propose is the basis for the UNSC rank system.
 * --RotBrandon 19:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)