Talk: Skire

Archives: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16

Sinkhole

Notable loot is correct. Two Quantums (1 is difficult to see, right between 2 safes) and one safe has 1 fixed Stealth Boy. So all good. Jspoel 22:32, September 18, 2013 (UTC)

You were lucky with those 3 Stealth Boys. Random loot I think. Jspoel 22:47, September 18, 2013 (UTC)

Your favourite RE games

I'm currently playing the whole Resident Evil series, and I'm currently on 2 for the gamecube and I was interested in how you ranked the games from most liked to least liked ect.

For me it's currently (With the number 1 being my favourite):

1) Resident Evil REmake

2) Resident Evil 0

It's worth noting however that I have played and completed Resident Evil 4 and 5, but I have never played 2, 3 or Code Veronica. So I want to play them all in chronological order in order to decide, because then it goes along with the story.

Regards, Brandon Fox (talk) 15:51, September 21, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not sure how Talkback works by the way, so I hope you don't mind the classic way of just leaving messages on the others profile :)

I've finished Claire scenario A, now I'm going for Leon scenario B, should be fun :D

I found a funny (in my opinion) parody of Resident evil 1 on youtube by the way. I think there's about 5 or 6 parts. Anyway, it's just enjoyable to watch what with the mocking it does on the gameplay and story and the funny voices it has. And it isn't done in a "cheap" way either of just stickmen or badly drawn animation, they look really good and took a while to make! Let me know what you think if you want http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wy9h7ynwtUA

Brandon Fox (talk) 16:13, September 24, 2013 (UTC)

Birds of a Feather

Hey there, you're welcome, and thanks! Most of the time people get the point after one undo, but there are some who just don't listen, (I'm sure you would have noticed eventually), anyway thanks again and I'll keep trying my damnedest! --Tribal Wisdom (talk) 22:25, September 21, 2013 (UTC)

Donutz

What it looked like to me, there were no changes to the page. 05:46, September 22, 2013 (UTC)

Notable loot: pre-war money in Lucky 38

Seems like something worth mentioning, but ok. Biberoi (talk) 19:05, September 23, 2013 (UTC)

RE:Jason Bergman

I should've known there would be a source somewhere, but I felt as if it didn't belong there (which you stated) and I should've said "It doesn't belong there" in the edit summary to begin with. Sorry for the inconvenience. --THE NUCLEAR KING ^Talk 02:04, September 24, 2013 (UTC)

Early protection

You probably should have reset the page to the last version before locking it. I doubt Yukichigai has the capability to actually check what they are claiming. Great Mara (talk) 00:20, September 25, 2013 (UTC)

Cont:

I have added in my input, and the debate has degraded into circular logic and semantics, with the other side refusing to provide sources towards his claim. I have left a decree on the TP, but since you were the initial Admin present, I want to hear your thoughts before going any further. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 02:25, September 25, 2013 (UTC)

It does add a little bit of excitement to the wiki. ;) Especially since it's been so lazy around here lately. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 03:09, September 25, 2013 (UTC)

Gallows

I got up and was set to change it to exactly what you did in the last edit. The second is very speculative but we always interpret the name of the quest if applicable.--TwoBearsHigh-Fiving 22:11, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

I concurr with your version. Obvious phrase is obvious. Agent c (talk) 22:14, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Gallow's Humour

I'm afraid I'm going to have to be that guy. The anon was correct to remove that BtS information. Not only is it speculative, but it's bad speculation. Gallow's Humour in technical terms has no correlation to the unmarked quest of the same name in Fallout 3. They plain and simply do not relate to each other, and so we cannot make the assumption that there is a reference involved there. I'll wait for your input, but at this point, I'm leaning towards removing it again as it breaks our policies. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 22:18, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

You're right. There are numerous article-pages that still need cleaning up. In this case, like I told Ryan, the problem with speculation is, those making it always thinks they're right. That's why we need sources, except in the rare cases where geek knowledge can be applied such as with That Gun. Is there any evidence at all to defend this information? Because right now, I'm only seeing an assumption based on the name. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 22:31, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

From Garoux's TP:

I can see where you're coming from, but I must say I can't agree with that. Certainly the quest itself has nothing to do with actual gallows humour, but nonetheless the quest name is derived directly from that term. If something as apparent as this qualifies as speculation, then countless other entries that fall under the same circumstances will meet deletion as well... --Skire (talk) 22:26, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

The quest's name is derived directly from the term? Can you cite where you're getting that? 68.197.229.108 22:27, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

What about Straus Calls, Aba Daba Honeymoon, Eyesight to the Blind, We Are Legion, or Sierra Madre? They have no sources, yet their references and the sources of their respective names are so obvious one would not need to waste time finding a definitive source. Countless quest names are named after '50's songs, but according to the arguments here, they're speculation unless the content of the song pertains to the quest. --Skire (talk) 22:44, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

If there's no source, there's no need. 68.197.229.108 22:45, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Just answer this question, and we can add the reference in:

Do you know that the quest's name is a direct reference to the term? 68.197.229.108 22:48, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

We're not Britannica... citing every damn obvious thing is impossible, absurd and counter productive. Agent c (talk) 22:34, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

There are degrees. For instance, if we have a song in Fallout that has an identical title to a real-life song of the same time-period, then it's likely, or possibly, even obvious. But it's still speculation. However, if the songs were of a similar nature as well, such as with lyrics or underlying meaning, then it would be accepted as trivia in our article-pages.

This is one of those cases where it's obvious, but is still speculation. We have the identical names, but literally, nothing else. That's what separates this speculation from the other acceptable trivia we have here. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 22:51, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

"Understood, but it doesn't change the fact that the name is based on that term." End the schism! Where are you getting this information from? 68.197.229.108 22:55, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

• "Understood, but it doesn't change the fact that the name is based on that term."
  • Where is your proof for that? I've already explained that the quest has absolutely no correlation to the technical meaning of Gallow's Humour. You need to prove contrary to that statement, as what I presented to you is factual.
• "Relevancy to the corresponding in-game content is not a criterion for inclusion of information in "behind the scenes" sections, only direct textual correlation is."
  • Can you please show me where you got that notion from? I have the policies pulled up, and each and every one of them contradicts that statement. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 22:57, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

"Behind the scenes" information in the form of cultural references is acceptable page content only when there are direct visual or textual correlations. Unless someone here has a batphone to Todd Howard's office, we're going to need to use a little common sense, rather than 200% verification. Its a well known popular term that is clearly a pun... Surely you dont need to cite me to know my username is a pun too. Agent c (talk) 23:00, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

You need to prove that there is a direct correlation as you claim. There's no evidence of that. 68.197.229.108 23:05, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

That reinforces my question. He clearly stated that only direct textual correlation is needed, which is not what that policy says. Anyways, I rebut those claims with a few other policies:

• All content needs to be accurate. Fallout Wiki aims to provide reliable information. In particular, adding speculation and own inventions (fan fiction, fan art etc.) to articles should be avoided.
• All content needs to be verifiable. Other editors need to be able to check and verify it.
• All content needs to be objective. Opinions, gameplay strategy, and "my favorite"-style passages should not be added to articles.
• In general, content should be written in a style appropriate for an encyclopedia. Descriptions should be clear and precise; speculations or uncertain facts should be avoided.

^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:07, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

That reinforces my question. He clearly stated that only direct textual correlation is needed, which is not what that policy says.

Actually, it is. OR is alternative. you do not need to have both. As for the other things, Its plain obvious. The guys name is Gallows, as a quest its a bit of a joke, so they took a common phrase out there to name the quest. There is no non absurd alternative. Next you'll be telling me we can't say Reilly's Rangers (quest) isnt a reference to Reilly's Rangers because noone has a recording of Todd Howard saying it. Agent c (talk) 23:12, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

"The guys name is Gallows, as a quest its a bit of a joke, so they took a common phrase out there to name the quest."

Okay, fine. How do you know? 68.197.229.108 23:15, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

I think it was obvious in my reasoning there. Subject of quest: Gallows. Popular Phrase: Gallows Humour. 1+1=2. Do you have any other plausable explanation for the pairing of the word "Gallows" with "Humour". Agent c (talk) 23:19, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Don't want to interject too much, but I'm taking a quick dinner break. I'm enjoying this debate a rather lot actually, so I'll be back soon! --Skire (talk) 23:17, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Conclusion

I believe we've just about exhausted this debate, as we are now officially coming around full-circle. Here is what I've managed to collect from our efforts:

Pro-trivia:

• Identical name/textual correlation.

Pro-speculation:

• Gallow's Humour in Fallout 3 has absolutely nothing in-common with the technical term. This is proven here.
• There are no allusions in-game to even suggest a direct correlation. There is only the name, which could simply be a coincidence with nothing else to back up the alleged reference.

Policies:

• All content needs to be accurate. Fallout Wiki aims to provide reliable information. In particular, adding speculation and own inventions (fan fiction, fan art etc.) to articles should be avoided.
• All content needs to be verifiable. Other editors need to be able to check and verify it.
• All content needs to be objective. Opinions, gameplay strategy, and "my favorite"-style passages should not be added to articles.
• In general, content should be written in a style appropriate for an encyclopedia. Descriptions should be clear and precise; speculations or uncertain facts should be avoided.

Conclusion:

• This reference cannot be confirmed, which breaks policy.
• The pro-trivia arguments have been based solely on personal opinion, which breaks policy.
• The fact that there are editors unsure of this reference, as well as the subjective nature of the opposing party which has not presented any proof, whatsoever, makes this information an uncertain fact, which breaks policy.

I am going to leave that information on the article-page for the remainder of the day. But unless a source is provided verifying this information, I will be removing it by tonight. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:20, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Good. I think it's time someone provides some credible evidence other than citing what they think or "common sense". 68.197.229.108 23:23, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Common sense falls under the same line as speculation. Everyone thinks they have common sense regarding matters, and the people who come up with speculation of course believe they're right. It's the very definition of subjectivity. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:27, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

m, no. You dont get to decide to rule by fiat here leon. I, Skire, and Ry are all admins too, you do not outrank us. I disagree completely with your conclusions here. The correlation is the name of the subject of the quest, you have completely disrregarded that. I think you've also forgotten that the articles, and our actions have to be read through the goggles of common sense. Agent c (talk) 23:25, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Look, if there's no credible evidence, then it's being removed. This is true for any piece of questionable information. Regardless, it should be removed anyway until a consensus has been reached. 68.197.229.108 23:26, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid I stand by my decision, until a source is provided. My decision is protected by our policies. It is you, that's mistaken, as being an Admin in agreement with other Admins does not allow you to bypass policy. By disregarding our policies, it is setting a bad precedent. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:27, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

That is not our policy. We do no only add things by consensus, when people object to changes then no change is made until consensus is reached. There is no consenus so the null position - no change - is the correct one to be adopted. You are correct in that being an admin does now allow you to bypass policy, so why are you bypassing it by acting as if this is your private fiefdom? You are not - repeat - not - the sole interpreter of policy here. I cite the following.

• Do not start edit wars: Be ready to discuss your changes with others. If you disagree with another editor, discuss the issue either on user or article talk pages. Repeatedly reverting each other's changes ("edit warring") is bound to escalate the conflict instead of solving it. If you cannot reach a consensus, ask another user to mediate. In general, if someone reverts an edit you made, you should not re-add it without reaching a consensus on the article's talk page.

You do not have consenus to make that change. Agent c (talk) 23:32, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

You are taking the DNSEW policy out of context. I have exhausted debate with no evidence being shown. The information currently breaks policy, and policy clearly dictates to remove speculations and uncertain truths.

I'm done here. I provided the necessary policies; verbatim. (Multiple policies) You have not pulled out any policies that contradict them. Either show me the policies that protect your statement, or provide evidence towards your initial claim. I have nothing further to say until one or the other is presented. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:34, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Someone really needs to provide verifiable and objective evidence to back the reference up or it's being removed. This is how it is for any information. End the discussion now by backing the reference up. 68.197.229.108 23:36, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

The policy preventing any further change to that page in the meantime is quoted above. It is not out of context, it deals with this situation specifically "In general, if someone reverts an edit you made, you should not re-add it without reaching a consensus on the article's talk page" The edit was reverted, there has been no discussion on the talk page. If you want your change, go get consenus, then you can change it. If either of you remove it in the meantime, I will consider it a breach of the user conduct guideline (again, quoted above for your reference). Agent c (talk) 23:38, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

There is nothing objective or verifiable that serves as a justification for having the reference in. If you want it to stay, provide evidence for it. We can't wait on a consensus because there's nothing to disagree over. You don't have any facts on your side, and this whole debate is just prolonging the reference's inevitable removal. 68.197.229.108 23:41, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

It is indeed taken out of context. That policy is a preventative measure put into place to determine what is right or wrong, when both parties are of a bias nature. I have seen the discussion period through. We have debated our points, and I ended it once the opposing party began repeating themselves, without presenting evidence.

So now this is a farce. No evidence from your sides. Without a source, and the opposing party's only argument being that of personal opinion and their perception of common sense, I am now forced to act upon our policies. Our policies clearly dictate that speculation and uncertain truths are not allowed. You attempting to filibuster me does not bypass our policies, and you are currently breaking our policies by allowing that information to stay without a source. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:43, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

And our policies also state a consensus is required. Two out of five is not a consensus, its not even a majority. Go and get consenus and I'll back you up, until then, it is a breach of policies to revert a revert without a consensus as discussed on the talk page. Agent c (talk) 23:44, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

What's required is evidence. I feel like my attempts to say this are futile. We can argue about policy in a moment, but can you please provide objective evidence that your claim is true? 68.197.229.108 23:47, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I don't know how much my opinion would stand here, but I feel I'm rather impartial and I gave this a read through, so here is my two cents. The name probably is a reference to the term, as there is no real other reason for it to be called that and, unless it came from the term "Gallow's Humor" they may as well have called it "Gallow's Spare Rib" as the only thing in the quest that connects to the name is the character's name. However, Leon is correct about our policies (or at least how they are written) - we cannot keep something that is unverified just because a few people think it is true because using that logic we may as well keep every "this is a reference to" comment added to pages.
So my opinion is as follows; yes it is a reference, but without the proof of that it shouldn't be there. If we want to keep it, then we need to change the rules. (Also you'll need to make that a three out of six, which leaves us at a tie)JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?" 23:51, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate your input, Jasper. I hate to call so much fuss towards such a minor issue. But policies cannot be ignored unless we're willing to change them first. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:55, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

Conclusions are being drawn although, as c said, there is no consensus whatsoever? No one is violating policy, but rather violating your specific interpretation of policy, which if your personal opinion. As for repeating arguments, it has been done only because I have yet to hear more than condemnation of long-standing content as speculation, and continued instances of "how do you know?" I am not the most eloquent person, nor the most articulate, but I can be no more concise than to say, "I know Gallows Humor is a reference to the term "gallows humour" because it is self-evident word play on the name of Knight Captain Irving Gallows' name with a popular term. I know this because Gallows Humor (the quest) and gallows humour (the term) are identical."

If it should be necessary, I am willing to call a quick public referendum to decide on this issue. The outcome of such a referendum I will accept regardless of my own views on the matter. But what I am not willing to, and will not accept, is any decision made by an invested party in the debate on the grounds that they are taking the objective side and are thus, correct. We don't have a source for this reference, but neither does plenty of other information on our articles, so much so that it has gone largely unnoticed.

Should any action be taken without community consensus or at least consensus from those currently involved in the debate, and upheld, I will apply the principle of stare decisis and make similar changes to all articles that fall under the same circumstances as the matter at hand.

It is getting late and I wish to pause the matter for now. I truly appreciate all the arguments brought up by both sides and must say, this has been one of the most interesting debates since I've joined this wiki. My respect for opponents has only gone up as they present their points and state their arguments, as well as for upholding their beliefs throughout the debate. --Skire (talk) 23:58, September 27, 2013 (UTC)

"I know Gallows Humor is a reference to the term "gallows humour" because it is self-evident word play on the name of Knight Captain Irving Gallows' name with a popular term. I know this because Gallows Humor (the quest) and gallows humour (the term) are identical."

Saying that this is self-evident is saying no proof is needed; it's just true. This is not the case. And what? They have the same name therefore one caused the other? That's not going to get you anywhere. And I can promise that I won't remove the note until a consensus is reached, but it will be removed if people cannot provide sufficient evidence. 68.197.229.108 00:06, September 28, 2013 (UTC)

Read my post on User_talk:The Gunny#Gallows_Humour:_Conclusion. Both sides arguments are continuing ad infinitum and producing nothing of note. I'm waiting on bureaucrat response and/or the possibility of a referendum, if necessary. --Skire (talk) 00:10, September 28, 2013 (UTC)

And I thank you for your passion in this debate, as well. I will go ahead and address your points since you weren't here for my conclusion:

• "Conclusions are being drawn although, as c said, there is no consensus whatsoever?"
  • Consensus does not bypass policy unless the explicit intent of consensus is to override existing policy. 80 anons can oppose 6 administrators over being able to write "penis" in our article-pages. Doesn't mean anything, since it clearly violates our policies.
• "No one is violating policy..."
  • The information that has remained during the duration of our debate is against speculation policies.
• "...but rather violating your specific interpretation of policy, which if your personal opinion."
  • I quited multiple policies verbatim. They were not modified. They were not taken out of context. "Descriptions should be clear and precise; speculations or uncertain facts should be avoided." - That is exactly what I've been saying, and is not my personal opinion, as that quote is a direct policy.
• "I know this because Gallows Humor (the quest) and gallows humour (the term) are identical."
  • I provided a link above to the literal definition for Gallows Humor. I have already proven that they have nothing similar to link them to each other besides the textual name.
• "If it should be necessary, I am willing to call a quick public referendum to decide on this issue."
  • Whatever the outcome, policy would still be taken into account over all else.
• "But what I am not willing to, and will not accept, is any decision made by an invested party in the debate on the grounds that they are taking the objective side and are thus, correct"
  • We have never stated that we are correct. That's the difference between our opposing parties. We are not allowing personal opinion nor bias into our arguments. We are strictly sticking to wiki policies.
• "I will apply the principle of stare decisis and make similar changes to all articles that fall under the same circumstances as the matter at hand."
  • That would be best. Just be careful with geek knowledge. For instance, That Gun has no verification, but it physically identical to the last detail with the gun seen in Blade Runner.

^{Some Assembly Required!} 00:11, September 28, 2013 (UTC)

I've also read over what you had to say, and I found the following:

"It is indeed true that we do not have an actual, valid source for the note. This is because it is not needed, due to the rather obvious nature of the note. Having to get sources for all claims of the sort is extremely impractical, and would surely result in the subsequent deletion of other similar notes. It is true that something being obvious is an opinion."

In this one statement, you said that you have no valid source for having the reference. You justified this by saying that the alleged reference is "obvious" but then admit that this is subjective reasoning. Why then should we even consider this?

Your claim that the quest's name is directly from the term is a guess. Sure, it could be likely, and you might think it's "common sense", but that's your opinion. No one's opinion should be inserted into articles; it's out job to ensure that we provide objective information, free from opinion. 68.197.229.108 00:15, September 28, 2013 (UTC)

And why does it matter that we'd have to remove similar references from other pages? If there's no proven link, that they too should be removed. 68.197.229.108 00:17, September 28, 2013 (UTC)

Skype

Yeah that sounds fine! (ryan.lanese) --TwoBearsHigh-Fiving 03:00, September 28, 2013 (UTC)

TP

I disagree that the old posts should be exempt from our current policies. We have spelled out that talk pages should be for discussion about the article, and we would be doing a poor job enforcing that if we allow for posts that are just general discussion to appear. 68.197.229.108 01:29, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

Okay you can go ahead and dismiss me, but leaving those posts in is setting a bad example. On Veronica's page, for example, the first two posts break policy. If this is the first thing users are going to see when they view a talk page, what do you think they're going to assume is allowed? What kind of example would we be setting? 68.197.229.108 01:37, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

So, you're fine with having the old posts be deleted? 68.197.229.108 01:43, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that if a post has to do with the article, not simply the subject of the article, it can stay. I'm just a little confused as to why posts before Sep. 2009 should stay. The policy states that talk pages should include posts related to discussing the article, and I can't find anywhere that indicates that older posts should be exempt. 68.197.229.108 01:50, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

Again, where does it say that that policy are not retroactive, as you put it? 68.197.229.108 02:14, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's interesting that we can't find the exact discussion where this was determined. I think this might be something worth talking about some other time. I'm still concerned that older posts displaying general discussion are what welcome all users to some talk pages. I'm certainly seeing a lot of misuse now; I'm sure you can agree. And I'm also sure letting these older posts sit in our talk pages isn't helping to indicate what is allowed to be posted. 68.197.229.108 02:29, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm getting tired too. I hope we can discuss this some more when the time comes. 68.197.229.108 02:34, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

I am with GECK anon here - even though they came before the rule was implemented that doesn't mean they should be exempt from the rule; everything on the wiki should follow the same rules or it looks messy and uncoordinated. Plus, if there are a ton of talk page posts like that then it sets the example that they're the correct place to put such content. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?" 02:30, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Hey

It's good to be back, but I think I'll leave that for the time being! It is certainly does have it's oddities, (in a good way), I thinks amazing how people write it with the same ease as other languages, it's rather complex but none-the-less intriguing. I see the problems with translations, I'm sure you remember the issues over what the Chinese on the Chinese stealth armor page means, or doesn't, it's still there so I guess someone made that decision.

Anyway, I really appreciate that thought, I can only do what I can, and I'd rather not upset people, I'm not expecting such a development very soon, but who knows, I was surprised to get patroller rights! Catch you later. --Tribal Wisdom (talk) 15:44, September 30, 2013 (UTC)

---

GarouxBloodline - Some Assembly Required! TALK - New Features Discussion Hey, Danny. When you get the chance, can you give this forum a look? I have a few finished ideas that I'd like to get some community input from, and your feedback would be appreciated.

Wasteland adventurer

Realized it should be lower case five seconds after I added him to the characters page. Thanks for fixing it! 68.197.229.108 02:02, October 2, 2013 (UTC)

Defiantly. I'm going through the GECK right now, and I'm amazed that there are so many characters we've yet to include. Hopefully I can get some pages and mentions of them up soon. 68.197.229.108 02:10, October 2, 2013 (UTC)

Opera

Hey, Danny. I know that you use Opera, as well, and I was wondering if it's giving you trouble with div tags, as well? ^{Some Assembly Required!} 20:23, October 2, 2013 (UTC)

Books

That's a good note. You can see the mention of the book in the notable section on the REPCONN test site page (uncollapse). Jspoel 23:22, October 2, 2013 (UTC)

Although 250 seems a bit much. But it's possible probably with all those different sort of books. Jspoel 23:24, October 2, 2013 (UTC)

Apprentice

Hey - you weren't in Skype, so I'll go ahead and send this message to you here. I've been finishing up a lot of my pages, and right now, I'm converting them from rough draft form into my blog-space. As I finish with each page, I'll link them to you on your TP and we can go over them. :D Hopefully this entry will be to your liking, and we can get some interesting ideas thrown between the two of us once the lining has been set! ^{Some Assembly Required!} 00:12, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Grammar

"You could also kill Harland and access the terminal upstairs that contains the invoice, or sneak past him and access the terminal that way."

This is an incorrect usage of "that". The proper word should be "which", as it was before the user made the change. 68.197.229.108 03:36, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

The "regard" edit can stay. I find "regarding" more fluent than "regard to", but again, it's fine. 68.197.229.108 03:42, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Why would it be grammatically incorrect to have a comma before the which? "That" should be used if we're dealing with a restrictive clause, and we aren't. 68.197.229.108 03:47, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Sure. I find the sentence to be fine, not awkward, but yeah, it's best that you just come up with something new. 68.197.229.108 03:56, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Yep. Looks great. 68.197.229.108 04:02, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Piers Isley

I'm sure I've said this way too many times, but the only reason needed to remove content is that the content does not have a sufficient reason to appear in an article; it's the responsibility of the person adding the content to provide a justification for its appearance. In this case, however, I'll specify; the image is just speculation. 68.197.229.108 17:57, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

It's speculation to some degree, but i'm prety sure the makers of the game put a skeletton with personal belongings that do fit in the story, with the aim of insinuating this is the person. I support posting the version it is the person, but maybe it can be added "it is assumed that ...". S i'd put back the picture here and in the other article --Peace'n Hugs (talk) 18:00, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

"i'm prety sure" = speculation

"it is assumed that ..." = speculation 68.197.229.108 18:01, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry that the whole situation defiantly started out bad, but we've found a compromise, and I'm defiantly going to listen to what you said; I'll be sure to add edit summaries from now on.

On an unrelated note, I was wondering if I could get your input on this forum. I've also asked Agent c to take a look, and Garoux has already given some feedback. Thanks. 68.197.229.108 19:41, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Vandal

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Shurwam

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:94.0.136.86

He/she's ignoring our policy both as anonymous and in his/her account. 68.197.229.108 23:53, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Forum discussion

Hi, was wondering if you could take a look at This forum I've posted to replace our current gameplay help forums with links to the Fallout Answers wiki. Thanks. Agent c (talk) 11:22, October 10, 2013 (UTC)

Hey Bro. I need ya

User_talk:Chimerakiller is a sockpuppet of User_talk:Ballarms
Please take care of business.
JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?" 01:56, October 11, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?" 01:59, October 11, 2013 (UTC)

Promenius

I did that because I remember from my first few weeks here in November 2010 that I struggled with the categorizing and asked Itachou for help (check my Archive 1 talkpage). It was a bit of a pain back then :) So I thought I spare him the boring stuff and let him focus on the images. Jspoel 08:58, October 11, 2013 (UTC)

He's back

I had noticed it and remember the retreat from last year. Back to day 1 for the SofD badge again. Welcome back, we're still in one piece. Hope you find something fun and useful to do there again! Jspoel 23:07, October 14, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Edit Summary

I was just pointing out my discontent at how people just ignored the English language when they added in book titles and did not write out numbers. In cases like this, if their work is bad, I'll say something. It was certainly not the first time I was italicizing titles. 68.197.229.108 23:57, October 15, 2013 (UTC)

In this case, they weren't doing it differently, they were completely incorrect, at least for the book titles. Anyway, I'm happy to just continue italicizing titles and refrain from offending anyone with edit summaries. 68.197.229.108 11:14, October 16, 2013 (UTC)

Apprentice

Can you go over this page? I'll have the next one ready for you shortly. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 09:15, October 16, 2013 (UTC)

Good questions!

• I'll be explaining this more in-depth through the two quest-pages I get to write. As a summary, it is now 50 years after the events of New Vegas, and along with the reverse-engineering of technology looted from their war with the Enclave/BoS, the industrial capabilities of Vault City, their new food-sources using technology from Vault 22, and the new power coming in from Hoover Dam, the NCR are quickly becoming a modern nation able to produce their own goods and technology at an accelerated rate. Because vehicles and other machines are once again becoming the norm around NCR states, fuel-sources have once again become a commodity. Scavenging after almost 300 years can only provide so many fuel sources, and so the discovery of reports detailing a possible oil cache would be of great interest to the NCR.
• I explained it a bit on the location page, but I'll see about clarifying upon the situation more. Due to drilling under Alaska after its take-over by the United States government, a large portion of the land was hollowed out to a great extent, and when the bombs fell, the land fell apart into great fissures. This also severed its connection to Canada greatly, and as the ocean came in to fill the fissures created at the border, much of the remaining landmass was filled in, as well, leaving land-bridges to connect Canada and Alaska.
• The Alaska mainland was hit extremely hard. By the time of Fallout 4, only the strongest of isotopes have remained, making the fissures created by the bombs the most dangerous radiation zones. However, the Pacific was greatly affected the bombs, with much of its ecosystem mutated. As the wild-life on land continued eating the mutated fish/etc. due to a lack of food right after the Great War, they were affected even more greatly by radioactive elements.
• As for the islands, they had no strategic importance, and the only effects they received from the bombs were radioactive elements due to ocean-life. The radioactive test site one is a good suggestion!
• Nearly 300 years after the volcano has erupted, the newly made island wouldn't be too booming with life, but would still be hospitable and inhabited by an ecosystem of its own. At least, that's what my research into volcano-made island has turned up. Please let me know if I'm wrong!
• Since I can only write a few pages for this challenge, and I'm only able to make but one faction page, I had to style my main location page similar to the Core Region article-page. Unfortunately, I'll only be able to write one faction in-depth, and I'm thinking of making that for the Ancestors.
• I think you'll like Zhu Bajie. I won't be able to touch up on much since I can't make any NPC pages, but I'll try and squeeze in the appropriate references.

Thank you for the critique! Please let me know if you have any further questions, and I'll have the starting mission page for you soon today. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 20:33, October 16, 2013 (UTC)

RE: Question

Hello, Skire. You have new messages at The Ever Ruler's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Skire. You have new messages at The Ever Ruler's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

... again <3

Featured articles

Hey Danny. A few months ago you set up a featured articles project and asked for people's help. I have the feeling it's grinded to a halt, already a few weeks back because I see nothing happening anymore. The Vault updating their articles which is a significant improvement and I'd like to see that happen here too. Those articles really need a change. Chance of any progress in the near future? Jspoel 15:35, October 18, 2013 (UTC)

Just now I notice there aren't any direct changes of articles. Only if an article wouldn't pass for the vote you'd find a replacement for it? What I would like is just throw (almost) everything overboard (except very important pages) right now and start with a complete clean slate. All these pages are so old and so in need of replacement. We need at least 300 new ones like the Vault does it (I think). Sorry to say, but I don't have that much faith anymore that you'll get consistent help. Kastera does it all by himself and he going fast pace just by himself alone. You're an admin, you can choose the new articles. First inventarize what we have per game and the type of pages, then consider what people most would like to see (f.e. weapons) and what we have good content for, like background. Use that to rework a page for a featured article. You can also use Kastera's Sandbox to see a good distribution of the articles types. You can choose some of them and some of your own, just make the featured article content yourself. Then we will have no problem with needing to use attribution. Best thing is to start with the 1 November featured article I think, then new content is shortly coming up. But first make a complete (365), good selection of articles and let me know when you're ready. It will take time but see what you can do. I'm busy with soundfiles at the moment, right now I can't help. Jspoel 20:46, October 18, 2013 (UTC)

Jspoel made a slight mistake. Pick out 366 good articles (not 365). You have to account for the leap day on February 29. :) --Kastera ^(talk) 21:47, October 18, 2013 (UTC)

Wow, that sounds very ambitious! Selecting 366 articles in 2 weeks time by yourself. Does that include creating all of them or just selecting them? Anyway, that would be great, but I don't expect you to realize that in such short time. It will take a lot of time and care to select them so perhaps take a small step back. How about selecting (all?) the articles and just creating them for the months of November and December. 60 articles in 2 weeks time. Then we would have a new rotation from 1 November onwards and for the rest of the articles you would have a wide margin again. Let me know of the progress, ok? Jspoel 16:44, October 19, 2013 (UTC)

Reading your message again you probably meants creating the list, not the actual articles. Well, that looks like it can be done. Anyway, once we have a list, we could even add 1 article for the next day so we would have a new rotation from then on. Jspoel 16:52, October 19, 2013 (UTC)

I'm just catching on to this right now, so forgive me if I've missed my opportunity, but do you need any help with evaluating articles on your http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/User:Skire/FA page? I've noticed there are a lot of blank spots under review, and reading them over sure beats listing factions from the GECK for an hour. 69.l25 (talk) 22:21, October 19, 2013 (UTC)

I've been going through the articles, and I'm very surprised at how much first-person was just completely overlooked and how many grammatical mistakes there are. I mean the first thing on John Maxson's page reads...

"General John Maxson is the grandson of Roger Maxson, and the High Elder of the Brotherhood of Steel in the year 2161."

and yet it was approved by four people anyway? We're practically saying, "Hey! We don't know when to use commas!" 69.l25 (talk) 17:32, October 20, 2013 (UTC)

Well, correct grammar should be an aspect you're paying attention to. I'm not saying I want to choose the articles for you, but if you're going to have a notice that says that x article is our best work, don't put it on an article with first person and bad grammar; you'd get the exact opposite of what you're trying to achieve. 69.l25 (talk) 18:33, October 20, 2013 (UTC)

Apprentice

Part 1 is now up for my Snow Blind quest-page. The human starting quest has been finished, and I'll be working on the ghoul character soon. Let me know what you think so far! ^{Some Assembly Required!} 14:57, October 19, 2013 (UTC)

Featured articles

Seems about ok to me. Maybe take a few off of Fallout and Fallout 2 and add them to Fallout 3, Fallout: New Vegas and their addons. The latest games have much more interest than the older ones so they can have a few more FA's. Perhaps a few less Fallout: BoS (to FNV). I'm not sure that games has enough quality pages to be featured. Jspoel 20:50, October 20, 2013 (UTC)

Broken Steel can probably also do with a few less. Jspoel 20:53, October 20, 2013 (UTC)

That looks good to me. You can make a start with selecting good articles now. Jspoel 21:03, October 20, 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Do you want me to just sort through the FO2 articles and clean up anything iffy? 69.l25 (talk) 23:18, October 24, 2013 (UTC)

Where do you want the articles to come from? The original list? 69.l25 (talk) 01:36, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

Okay I'll get started! Obviously just delete the article from the list if you think it doesn't fit. 69.l25 (talk) 01:48, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

I can fill out the infobox for any character page you add for FO3 or New Vegas; many of them are incomplete as of now. Just let me know or post the titles on the list page. 69.l25 (talk) 02:28, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

REmake

You cannot handle the awesomeness of Chris Redfield's alternate costume:

Seriously, why can't he dress like that for Resi 6?

Brandon Fox (talk) 21:40, October 20, 2013 (UTC)

He had to do something to prepare himself for his inevitable rematch with the infamous boulder from the REmake though, right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hh1g8JS5lhM

Ahh, true badassery!

Brandon Fox (talk) 17:09, October 21, 2013 (UTC)

fallout 3 has no "bullet mass"

what are you talking about? "bullet mass"? 205.206.75.3 05:13, October 22, 2013 (UTC)

Return! Reeeeee-turn. Return. Retuuuuuuuuuuuuurn. Retu-uhrn!

See, now the word just lost its meaning! Jamais vu in action! Anyway, I don't think I'll be making any long return at the moment; my life won't allow it, sadly, neither time nor motivation seems to present itself. One day I shall return to trod these ashen wastes once more, never fear! This turned out a lot more dramatic and whimsical than I intended it to. My sincerest apologies. But yes, perhaps one day, perhaps soon! Hugs ^{"Say 'ello to my little friend!"}

Apprentice

Ghoul section is now finished. Let me know what you think as I finish up with the super mutant starting quest. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:07, October 24, 2013 (UTC)

Snow Blind is now finished. This will be a pretty important page for my entry, so I'm looking forward to some feedback on it. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 05:03, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

Page 3 is now finished. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 18:28, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

Me?????? Late??????

I do my best ;) ^{Hawk da Barber 2012 - BSHU Graduate} 03:53, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

Apprentice Questions

• That was unfortunate. :( If it weren't for the restriction on this round, I would have definitely made them into completely separate quests instead of just one blanket quest.
• That does need more clarification. The water around the iceberg would be salt water, but like you said, the iceberg itself would be comprised of mostly fresh water. However, the compacted ice would be hard to chisel away in large amounts without proper tools. In the case of the Explorer, he didn't have hardy enough tools to chip away enough to stave off dehydration.
• I didn't want to detract too much away from the main quest, and I also wanted to allow the PC to identify with their character more by having the option to create their own backstory, which is helped with the Outcast's mental deterioration leading to amnesia of sorts. I do understand your point, though. I'll add on some of their background on the Zhu Bajie page. It'd be more relevant there, anyways.
• Good catch. What I was intending with that sentence, is that the Hubologists essentially regard ghouls as the epitome of human evolution, in which they represent the visage of their leader back in San Francisco, who was transformed into a ghoulish entity after the city was nuked in retaliation by the Enclave. This is clarified a bit more on the other pages.
• I explained this a bit more on the other pages. After San Francisco was annihilated by the Enclave, the Hubologists turned fanatical in their devotion after being brought back together by their now mutated AH-9. Over time, they became mindless zealots that mutilated their bodies to better represent their leader, with their higher standing members even ghoulifying themselves so they could enter the city and speak with him for orders. Due to their hatred of the Shi, which was amplified with their belief that the Shi were responsible with San Fran's destruction since the Shi had sneaked out of the city beforehand with the knowledge provided by the Shi Emperor.
• While a very slow process, my Fallout 4 canon confirms that a ghoul is still decomposing at a cellular level, rendering them weaker in constitution and perception. The neural degradation involved with this process also renders many ghouls feral when reacting to certain radioactive isotopes. The Outcast's origins will never be clarified. I believe that a certain amount of backstory is necessary in an RPG created for others, but I also believe that is should remain minimal.
• I explained what a wendigo was. :) It was a pretty short passage and all - they are pre-War primates that were dramatically mutated by the bombs. Unable to breed due to sterilization, but immune to the cell degradation that causes aging due to an increase in bio mass, the primates have recently migrated into Alaska due to its isolation and lack of predators in the great rifts. They're essentially the deathclaws of Alaska. They're rare, in very few numbers, and pack a mean melee.
• They're collectibles. I was wanting to add a short side-quest where you meet a wandering treasure-hunter that buys antiques, but I'm not sure how to do that anymore. The only reference I've made to him is through a side-quest involved with the super mutant starting quest.
• That is the holy city I made reference to. (It used to be the city of Anchorage) It is taboo to them, and entrance is only allowed to pay respect to the runestone kept there.
• In that mission of Halo: Combat Evolved, the first title when coming down in the Pelican is called "I could have been your daddy...". It's a good reference I think, as it's the first exposure Master Chief has to an arctic environment.
• Did I make a WoW reference? O:
• Please let me know if you have any more questions! I'll get to work on clarifying a few notes in just a bit. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:14, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

Also, did you check out my third page? That might clarify upon a few matters. I'd also really love your feedback there. As the page giving a summary of the main quest-lines, I could really use some feedback before finalizing it. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:18, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

Apprentice

Zhu Bajie is now finished. This one still needs a bit of work, I think. Let me know your thoughts. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 02:22, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

Fact Template

Oh lord have mercy. I don't want to think about that. ---bleep196- (talk) 03:03, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

My Fallout_promotional_items entry.

Hello, I'm one of the original Fallout game programmers. I'm Kevin on the Fallout_developers page. Thanks for correcting my Fallout_promotional_items entry. Frankly I haven't done much wiki editing, didn't RTFM, nor am I up on your "standards" here. So feel free to spice it up. Thanks,FalloutKevin (talk) 05:01, October 28, 2013 (UTC) Update Okay so some guy named GarouxBloodline just deleted the entire page. "05:26, October 28, 2013 GarouxBloodline (Talk | contribs) deleted page Fallout promotional items (No sources)" What does this mean "No sources", I am the "source" here.FalloutKevin (talk) 13:30, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I've asked MCA if he might be able to verify them. Given what he's said on his TP, I want to believe he is who he says he is... He's either very well informed, or legit. Agent c (talk) 22:01, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

Items confirmed legit. Agent c (talk) 01:02, November 2, 2013 (UTC)

FA

I think your standards are too high. Kastera has been able to compile a 366 list, so the articles are there. And I already got the feeling it's growing a bit over your head, even with help from 69I25. I just see you online 10 minutes a day or so and that's nearly not enough for such a big project. You don't have the time (and endurance?) like Kastera has. I'm sure he spending hours on it. Maybe you can use a good bunch of his suggested article names, and a few of yourself to get the list of 366 complete. A complete list of which you know you can make articles of is a first priority, so you will also know you have well divided topics throughout the year. Quality of the articles later on would be preferable, but that's taking even more time. So that's of lesser importance, I really want to see new articles. You won't make the 1st of November, but just postpone that 2 weeks of maybe even a month. From then on you can create a few articles a day and work from there. I hope you can make it work and find motivation. I hope to see some good progress now. Jspoel 21:54, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

Good luck! Don't worry if you can't make the 4th of November, selecting 366 articles and see if they're up to standard for FA is a lot of work. I don't want you to get stress over this. There are deadlines in businesses and school, we are a wiki where it's all voluntary and to have some fun, remember?:) Jspoel 22:19, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

I suggest that you choose the articles that should be important/informative/imperative to the wiki and write up blurbs for them as normal, but put them in a place where you will have ample time to improve them before they actually appear on the main page. There a few articles I picked out for The Vault's featured articles that are kinda lacking, but I put them in the spring or summer featured articles, so they can get worked on before they make their front page debut. Just an idea to think about. --Kastera ^(talk) 00:14, October 29, 2013 (UTC)

I've been very busy lately, but today I managed to get many more articles added to the featured articles page. I don't know if we're still going through with it though. Do you know if we are? 69.l25 (talk) 21:44, October 31, 2013 (UTC)

PoV

Detailed walkthroughs are one of the more important sections within our article-space, and I'd have to say to stick with our current guidelines/policies. The only real exception to the rule are the bug sections. (If we don't mention the obvious stuff like quotes) ^{Some Assembly Required!} 23:49, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

Final Day

Will you be able to finish the promotional page today? The dead-line has been set for later in the evening, and it'll need to be done by then. I know the pressure has been amped up for you regarding your featured articles project, so I'll understand if you can't help me with the page. Just let me know so I'll know whether to wait on you or if I should write the page myself. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 14:53, October 29, 2013 (UTC)

I understand. :) I guess everything is due tomorrow, actually. I went ahead and wrote out the page, but feel free to add any ideas you might have if the time permits it. ^{Some Assembly Required!} 01:48, October 30, 2013 (UTC)

Looks good. What should I leave out, then? ^{Some Assembly Required!} 18:19, October 30, 2013 (UTC)

Chat review

I am not sure, what side did you support. I read your comments & they sounded like support but Then I also read what Jasper posted as what I guess is a quote. It is confusing. Could you please clarify this one way or the other? Your voice holds weight here.

• One way or the other I thank you for your time.

SaintPain→ Here to help." 01:57, November 6, 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. If given the chance I fully understand I will be expected to use the chat box with even more respect than our most common member. I will consider it a tool to help others & celebrate achievements of our members.

SaintPain→ Here to help." 03:30, November 6, 2013 (UTC)

Ad meliora

Hey Danny. Sorry, I have no time to reply in Latin, something I feel bad about because you took the time. I'm taking a quick break from writing an essay due in on Friday and I still have 7 books to get through and another 2 articles as well, so please excuse me. I haven't used it in a while either, so I think telling you this would have taken a tad too long! Things aren't too bad thanks, my mum's still not even nearly well which is worrying, but that's not your problem; it's just seen as you wanted to know ;) I'm may be back soon, but it depends on a few things. I'm determined to finish my project, so I'll be doing that soon. Come Friday evening, I'll be doing the bits Leon asked me to do that I forgot about and then hopefully try to get back up to one page a day (sorry Leon if you're reading this). How are things with you?

Age quod agis!

Ci -- GOTW ^{User | Talk} 20:27, November 6, 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I forgot to say, my Mum is a little better, hence the subject title, as well as a nod to the overarching goal of a wiki ;) (First thing that popped into my head; if it was as witty as I thought it was I wouldn't be having to explain it now...)

Update

Don't worry about it. I'm always aware people have other priorities. Good luck with getting the list complete. Jspoel 23:47, November 8, 2013 (UTC)

Verify Tag

Hey Skire, I noticed that you removed the Verify template from that bug. Just thought I'd remind you that if you were able to replicate and verify the bug that you should place the {{Verify|verified}} tag onto it instead of straight up removing it. ---bleep196- (talk) 01:14, November 9, 2013 (UTC)

Not quite as old as me :P. ---bleep196- (talk) 01:42, November 9, 2013 (UTC)

Sig

Thanks! I know apocalypsis is third declension, but I was attempting to translate the phrase 'follower of the apocalypse' and to my understanding the preposition of makes apocalypse the ablative singular case, which means it would have the suffix -i? My latin is horrendous and maybe you are correct but I was sure I was right on this one... ^sectator_apocalypsi 08:09, November 9, 2013 (UTC)

Bible index

Thanks Danny, hoping to give other source docs a similar treatment. There is a key at the bottom, but I think it needs simplifying still. Agent c (talk) 22:28, November 9, 2013 (UTC)

Links

Hey Danny. I noticed the message you left on DarthOrc's page about links with the apostrophe. I think the issue is with wikiscript itself. I tested it and the only way that the script knows to include something outside the link brackets is for it to be a letter, not a symbol. Thus, the apostrophe negates this and it isn't recognized as part of the link. The way I see it there isn't going to be a fix or a workaround as it is part of wikiscript itself and that would have to be changed. I tested it with Visual editor as well and it results in the same thing ([[Moira|Moira's]]) when you return to source mode. So I guess what he is doing is the only way. ^sectator_apocalypsis 02:25, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Links

Greetings etc. etc.

We have experienced this on other Wiki's as well. However, we also know that while one can use lower or upper case on a one word link, (e.g. Cateye, cateye), on some Wiki's one cannot on some links with more than one word while we can on this Wiki. Perhaps this means someone higher in Wikidom can fix the ' problem for us.

Also, many do not seem to know that stimpak (Fallout) can be changed to stimpak (you need to view this in source mode to see what we did), which saves keystrokes :-D

While we are at least as lazy as the next editor, we have found no alternate to the form Cateye's, so we use it. DarthOrc (talk) 02:56, November 13, 2013 (UTC)

Are we still doing the FA ?

It seems to be locked.

SaintPain→ Here to help." 01:42, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough.. Now I know. Keep the faith & have fun out there.

SaintPain→ Here to help." 01:55, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

Skire

Well, I remember you better as SigmaDelta54. Got a new name, huh? (I liked the old one better!)
I'll edit every so often to alleviate boredom, y'know. Nice of you to drop me a message. How are things with you? 03:28, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

Tell me about it. Working two jobs, six days a week, one all day and the other all night. Plus add going back to university next year. I don't know where I'll find time for anything haha 03:39, November 14, 2013 (UTC)

Sig

Changed my sig again, is my latin correct? "We who are about to die salute you" ^{morituri te salutamus} 03:51, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

Suetonious was most definitely the inspiration. I cam across the term while I was doing a research paper. I wanted to modify it to make it more personal. I'm glad I got it right this time! ^{morituri te salutamus} 20:37, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

Apprentice

Thanks. Although, I feel I could've done more with my final. Then again, it's hard to cram all your ideas for a whole game in a few articles. You ever consider going on the Apprentice? Paladin117^{>>iff bored;} 03:03, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Edits

You're welcome. =) I know that there is lots of room for improvement, because I still don't know how to link to, say, the section "Giant radscorpion" on the radscorpion page. And "downtime"? Is that a timeframe between game releases, or just a time of the year when no one edits? And I'm afraid that I don't quite know the duties/responsibilities of a Patroller. Leea (talk) 12:39, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Featured Articles

I'll start working on them right now! 69.l25 (talk) 01:24, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

I'll try and finish FO2, but first I'm making sure we have all stats for FO3 and NV articles. 69.l25 (talk) 01:48, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

Good news! All the pages' infoboxes for Fallout 3 and its addons are complete! I'll try to do the same for New Vegas then I'll finish up Fallout 2. 69.l25 (talk) 21:39, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

I can try and get New Vegas & addons done today and start some FO2 articles. When's the list due? 69.l25 (talk) 16:45, November 29, 2013 (UTC)

NotY Board

How do you go about choosing the board? I doubt I'll be nominated this go 'round, but I'd be more than willing to help out on the board if needed. ^{morituri te salutamus} 21:28, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

Invitation

Thanks for inviting me and I'll be glad to accept being on the board. I'm available most nights and some mornings. One question though, why specificially the Chinese chat? Paladin117^{>>iff bored;} 22:38, December 1, 2013 (UTC)