User talk:Subtank

Welcome to my page!! I am usually online between 06:30 till 16:30 UTC. So if you leave a message between those times, I will surely respond it immediately UTC DATE FORMAT: Thursday, 2024-05-02 06:46 UTC This is the actual time in UTC when you loaded this talk page... Please keep the grammar and structure of your message clean and clear...

Discussion Archive

sup

Just curious, why did you revert the changes that I made? E: and if you reply "no evidences" it's a trivia section. Trivia section is made for speculation FlamingRain 14:19, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

Trivia information should be provided with proper sources and evidences. Otherwise, you'll find the Battle Rifle article to be full of trivia such as "This is a UNSC Weapon", "It is used mostly by Humans", "You can make headshots with it", "It can be used to snipe people".- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 14:23, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

okay. I think that's pretty retarded but I guess I'll go back and revert and cite a source with it.—This unsigned comment was made by FlamingRain (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~

No. First state your issue in the talk page of the article and if everyone agrees with you, then add it.- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 14:26, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

You keep wiping the talk page though.--Sandor051 18:34, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Because it is irrelevant to the article. People keep trying to notify the community that Jorge-052 sounds British. Why is that so important? Sense of nationalism? Sense of pride? Sense of patriotism? We don't practise that in Halopedia. It is idiotic and complete nonsense. Unless it is a whole different case, it stays deleted.- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 19:06, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

It's notable. That would be why. And irrelevant of what you think, wiping the talk page is baffling. Because it would be the perfect place to discuss this. --Sandor051 21:07, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Sandor. Wiping the talk page is pointless and appears reminiscent of the Cold War days when Russia blamed all it's failures on something impossible and then erased all pertinent evidence. Out of that, only the erasing of evidence applies here. The talk page should be kept as a record of debated materials. There's bound to be someone who will come along later thinking to put some tidbit in a page that has already been agreed upon as irrelevant. Except this fellow wouldn't know that, since the talk page is empty.

File:Gunnery Sergeant.png  ΘяɪɸɴF22    Me    Talk    Contributions    CAG   21:11, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it's not notable. It is redundant. It's just the voiceactor's voice. What if it were to be a Chinese voiceactor, would that be notable? No. If the talk page contains good discussions that directly affects the content of the article (such as verifying rumours or expanding facts), then it can stay.

To OrionF22: Problem is that the talk page contains discussion which is irrelevant to the article itself. We do not delete talk pages without any proper reasoning. If it were to contain social discussion which does not improve/enhance the article itself, what's the point of having a talk page?- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 21:15, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

"Actually, it's not notable. It is redundant. It's just the voiceactor's voice. What if it were to be a Chinese voiceactor, would that be notable?"

— You

That right there sounds worth mentioning in the talk page so you don't have to have the same issue again with another editor. What if you encounter this problem again? Had you left that part of the talk page alone, the editor might have been smart enough to look at it and realize that it had already been addressed. For this reason I believe that any piece of information referring to the article, no matter how seemingly irrelevant, should be left alone, so that some bozo doesn't repeat the same thing all over again. I understand why you would want to remove the social aspects, but if this socializing is discussing the article and what to do with it, then that too should be left alone. I thought that was what a talk page was for. So far, I haven't seen anything in a talk page worth deleting.

There is probably some two-watt out there who put something ridiculous in a talk page (or will). Perhaps it was a duplicate. That should be deleted, but perhaps a new subtopic should be created addressing the deletion of such content? This would allow users to chip in and voice their opinions as to the relevancy of this article, instead of just deleting it outright and leaving some users inquisitive as to why.

File:Gunnery Sergeant.png  ΘяɪɸɴF22    Me    Talk    Contributions    CAG   21:24, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Halopedia is not a social site. If they insist on doing so, just use the Message Board feature provided by Wikia. Again, if it is related to the article and it could improve the article, it would stay. If the discussion strays off from the original topic, then it will be removed.

Regarding the voiceactor issue, it would be far better to have a link to the voiceactor profile (example, "He/She was voiced by INSERT VOICEACTOR HERE) rather than having a trivia which goes as such "This SPARTAN has an English accent" which is redundant and does not give any real information. This has been put into practise in Halopedia ever since it was first created.- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 21:36, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

I understand non-relevent topics will be removed. I'm not arguing that they stay. I am arguing that minor, seemingly inconsequential topics be left in so that something similar is not repeated. Otherwise you may have to deal with 100s of editors thinking the mention of an accent is noteworthy. I see how it looks so insignificant and trivial that it should be forgotten, but I argue that it stay so you don't have similar problems down the road. Additionally, this should reduce the number of pointless or trivial edits if users can look at the talk page and see that what they want to put in is already addressed.

File:Gunnery Sergeant.png  ΘяɪɸɴF22    Me    Talk    Contributions    CAG   21:48, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

I understand. :)

Just a suggestion: Keep the signature simple. :P - 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 21:54, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Yes this Wiki isn’t a social site. But a debate on whether or not the accent is notable is exactly why the talk page is there. So we can decide what relevance the information has, and lay out arguments for/against inclusion. And we do have precedence, for example it is considered notable that Byrne is the only Irish character seen thus far in Halo. Further I would consider it notable to mention if a character had a Chinese accent. It’s an integral part of their character, or at least it influences the way they are interpreted, a filter through which the user percieves them. --Sandor051 12:58, December 16, 2009 (UTC)

"Regarding the voiceactor issue, it would be far better to have a link to the voiceactor profile (example, "He/She was voiced by INSERT VOICEACTOR HERE) rather than having a trivia which goes as such "This SPARTAN has an English accent" which is redundant and does not give any real information. This has been put into practise in Halopedia ever since it was first created."

— Accent issue

Again, the solution to this issue is not to mention what accent they have, but to point out who is the voiceactor. This issue has been resolved in the past.- 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 13:43, December 16, 2009 (UTC)

Subtank, I'm not even sure why you're a moderator. There's a talk page for a reason, to discuss facts and to see if it's relevant to add into the page. To discuss what seems to be irrelevant and then see if it's relevant enough to some people to add in. That's what the point is. You even told me that. However, you keep walking into the talk pages and wiping them clean because they are discussing "irrelevant information" even if it is quazi-relevant. You're contradicting yourself. Try harder next time.

FlamingRain 21:49, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Did you not read any of the above statements? Subtank wipes sections that are irrelevant, social or unneeded discussions. I have seen this in all the wipes she has done. If a discussion topic isn't relevant to the article, or its plain unneeded or obvious, it goes off. - File:Major.png Nìcmávr ^(Tálk) 21:52, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Yet is that not the point of a talk page? To determine the relevancy of new information? That's what it was last time I checked. Once the information is agreed upon as irrelevant by the contributions of other users on the talk page, then it could be removed, but I believe it should stay, so that no one else down the line asks the same question. File:Gunnery Sergeant.png  ΘяɪɸɴF22    Me    Talk    Contributions    CAG   21:57, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but that's when a discussion topic is unclear whether or not its relevant. If something is clearly unneeded, social or plain obvious discussion, there isn't a need to consult before removal. Yes, a talk page is for discussion in accordance to an article, yes it is to determine relevancy for information. But I repeat, if a discussion topic is clearly unneeded, its to be removed. Take this case for example. Or in this, in which she restored relevant discussion content. Subtank doesn't go into talk pages and madly start deleting or restoring whatever she likes. There's a reason she (and others who do it) do that. - File:Major.png Nìcmávr ^(Tálk) 22:09, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

I understand that. I know Subtank does not have a motive for spontaneously deleting material from talk pages, nor was I implying that she did/does. What I am saying is exactly what you are saying, with the exception that certain 'unneeded' material be left alone. This material is previous information that was posted to determine its relevancy to the article. I suggest it be left there so no one else in the future asks the same question, i.e. you determine that the fact that Pelicans share similarities with the V-22 Osprey is irrelevant to the Pelican article in the talk page, then I would say leave that discussion there so another user does not ask that same question later. If you leave it there, then perhaps that user will see it before editing, thus preventing the whole thing from repeating itself. Saves the admins some time, as well as other users. File:Gunnery Sergeant.png  ΘяɪɸɴF22    Me    Talk    Contributions    CAG   01:39, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

Why lock the page?

Would you like to explain why you locked the lone wolf page for noble team? now that Microsoft has confirmed that he is a spartan 3 nobody but an ad min can edit the page (and of course) get the points that shouldn't even be theirs. im all for improving,but locking that pages till December 2010 wasn't a smart move at all.```grey101

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/21746/Microsoft-Confirms-Spartan-IIIs-in-Halo-Reach/

It is locked, like with the Rookie, because of Speculation, vandalism and all that, they want facts with proof. ~Enlightment~ 10:06, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

"but an ad min can edit the page (and of course) get the points that shouldn't even be theirs." ...lol. Quit your whining. Points don't even matter. Most likely, it was locked (like most pages that are locked) because of excessively stupid edits. Smoke^{Sound off!} 15:02, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

Subtank: Because you are one of the last persons who edited the article and have the power to do it now, I request you to edit the Unidentified_Lieutenant_(Noble_Team) article to at least not say Spartan-II when all sources (http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/21746/Microsoft-Confirms-Spartan-IIIs-in-Halo-Reach/) point to it not being true.Mutoid Chief 20:27, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

That's ONE article for christ sake... not some "Oh yes, it says so, so it MUST be right" Don't believe everything you read... particularly when there is ONE article on it! ~Enlightment~ 20:46, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Subtank, I was just looking back on the Drone page, I'm gonna add a link or something for my little research study for the colour/possible rank variation soon when its complete. Anyway, I guess maybe I was having a bad day, but I didn't realise how pissy I was about it:

"Subtank I know you have a high rep, and that's been gained by doing a lot of good things, but "the reasoning that it's not actually a "real" rank because it's in firefight" is completely absurd. You are inducing your own pic 'n' mix, personal canon and pulling it over the rest of the community. Despite whatever good you've done, I'm not going to respond lightly to this, because to me that's crossing the line..." And so on...

Anyway, I'd like to apologise. I'm sorry. I was a bit overzealous and I can't shoot you down for having an opinion and just editing with the facts you had. You're doing a great job as an admin of the Halo wikia, keep going. Merry Christmas and peace out. -TheLostJedi 19:22, 25 December 2009 (GMT)

I understand your confusion over this matter, but I'm only relaying the information I have at my disposal. I would never introduce new rules or conclusions without a discussion. Anyway, it has been established that certain aspects of multiplayer are considered non-canon as stated previously by a Bungie Employee back during the release of Halo 2. I can't recall when it was mentioned or where I could find it (Bungie.net doesn't archive its past news). So, by all means, please do your research and inform me. :D - 5əb'7aŋk^(7alk) 18:20, December 26, 2009 (UTC)

Blog Series

Hi, Subtank. As the only female administrator, would you please take a look at my Examination of Female Characters (part 1, part 2) articles and tell me what you think? --Dragonclaws^(talk) 10:49, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

AV-14 Attack VTOL

Dear Subtank.

I want to know why did you delete my editing in the Hornet Article. It has bad grammar or what?

189.124.158.85 19:01, January 21, 2010 (UTC)