Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Halo/Archive 7

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by

Thanks. —

A whole chapter on the Halo universe and its development. — TKD::{talk} 20:47, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Nice find! Looks like some nice info to add to Cortana, ILB and the like. --Der Wohltempierte Fuchs ^(talk) 21:10, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Good job finding! Agreed: it is some nice information to add.--Rollersox (talk) 16:32, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I just found Wikipedia:Books and immidiately thought of this project. I know very little about it, but it basically seems that you can take any collection of articles (obviously the high the quality the better) and have them in one collection. From there you can view PDFs or actually order a real book containing those articles. With the number of high quality articles this project has I think it would be awesome to have a Halo book. Thoughts? blackngold29 14:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead, if you like. I recently noticed that the

featured topics now have links to books; we have one of the Characters, in fact, but are missing one for the Halo media topic. --Der Wohltempierte Fuchs ^(talk

) 16:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

• Factions of Halo
• Halo (megastructure)
• Jason Jones
• Michael Salvatori

*Alex Seropian

• Halo.Bungie.Org

And finally get

Amen, my brother :) Now that I'm near the book, I can start beefing up

Factions of Halo needs some more info on AI, some reception, and some minor sourcing. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk

) 19:11, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

All the ringworld article really needs now is some sourcing and a copyedit, and it's good for GA. I'll probably list it sometime this weekend. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 18:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

...Done, and I've put up Halo.Bungie.Org for GAN as I've pretty much exhausted secondary sources. The others will require more work. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:39, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Fantastic work! I'll start on Factions soon, and the others will probably work out for GA, though Mr. Salvatori...sigh, what do we do with that one? I never believed in permanent stubs, but my faith is being shaken by that article, too much to delete I think, too little to GA... Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:07, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Someone needs to do a flippin' interview with the man... while it won't affect our featured topics, it is annoying if we have one article we can never promote... --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 20:33, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

• Just wanted to pop by and say what a good job you guys are doing with the various Halo articles. Keep up the good work and have a pint on me, whomever gets here first can drink it.

WikiLove

by buying someone else a pint, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Cheers!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:WikiPint}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

If only we had this kind of effort over at

Sign

) 20:36, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Well to be fair Command and Conquer doesn't have the impact and thus good sources that Halo does... but thanks for the kind words. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 01:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I know there was already a discussion about but just to say can we maybe now have an article about it? Surely now there are enough references to find about it. And if there isn't enough, we can simply put it under a book stub and the article wouldn't come under violation of notability since it's part of a popular franchise which it links with the rest of the series. --Victory93 (talk) 08:25, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I have gone and deleted {{Halo chronology}}. It seems that people want to keep adding all the other media into the template. This a) makes the template much less useful, the more items populate it, and b) are tantamount to lying to the reader. Most of the books don't have such an easy time frame to pin down or say what comes "before" and after. The Flood takes place before the events of Halo: Combat Evolved. Where do you put the decade-spanning Fall of Reach in relation to everything? Finally, if we start listing the books we've essentially got to list every piece of Halo narrative fiction. This template serves no useful purpose. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:26, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it was people, I think it was just one user. Same user kept trying to expand other chronology templates into informational boxes rather than just navigational. ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 17:51, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced article if they are not sourced, so your project may want to pursue source these articles as soon as possible. See the next, message, which may help..

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me,

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me,

Ikip 02:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I was wondering if about their should be a separate page about Halo Evolutions? Which is a 400 page book consisting of short stories that take place in the Halo Universe. And also what about a separate page on the Spartan Project. Right now we only have a paragraph about it in the Characters of Halo article. Tell me what you think... CJISBEAST (talk) 15:05, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, CJISBEAST. The reason the Spartan Project doesn't have its own article (it used to) is because there's not enough real world information and reception to justify it. Fictional articles need evidence of notability through unrelated, reliable sources; Master Chief has his own article because he's won accolades and been the subject of academic research. The Spartans themselves, however, have virtually nothing written about them. As for Evolutions, I was unable to find the reviews that we would need to have a complete article on it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 12:40, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

You mean to say that their is no 'real world' info about about the Spartan Project. What about bungie.com? How did Halopedia.com make a long article on the Spartan Project? Don't they need references to back up what they write? Can't we use halopedia.com as a reference? CJISBEAST (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

By "real world" I mean sources not involved with the game's production, et al (so not Microsoft or Bungie or the like) discussing aspects of the game beyond the fictional (for example, "The Arbiter was originally named Dervish" instead of "The Arbiter and Master Chief work together" details.) Halopedia is a wiki and thus not an allowable source. You might want to read

WP:WAF to explain some of the differences in how we approach fiction instead of a fan wiki. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk

) 16:44, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Drat.......... CJISBEAST (talk) 18:13, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey all, I've been noticing recently that a great number of reliable references have been falling silent recently--including ones from Microsoft, who have revamped Waypoint (again) leading to a whole bunch of dark links. As such, I'm going to begin WebCiting every reference in our FAs (save those that already have Archive.org links.) If interested parties can help, please do, as this is going to take a very long time. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Progress

Ideally, every link should be archived where possible. Unfortunately the old Xbox.com ones seem unrecoverable... Here's the list, I'm going to check them off when they all have archives where possible for URLS, starting with the older sources and FAs where links are more likely to have gone dark.

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Halo articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:06, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey, Halo 3 was nom'd for a featured article review. There's a pre-evaluation process going on at Talk:Halo 3 where some legitimate concerns have been raised. If anyone can help address these, that'd be great. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 13:44, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi all,

As many of you probably know, Halopedia is a wiki dedicated to the Halo franchise and series. This wiki had an article here on Wikipedia, but has been deleted after repeated recreations in the past due to the lack of sources/citations. After a while most of that took place, I would like to bring to your attention this list consisting of Halopedia's media & news mentions and have a possible discussion to gather your opinions on whether we could bring the Halopedia article back onto Wikipedia.

Regards,

Nicmavr (talk) 20:58, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't say any of those mentions reach the threshold required for notability. If you'd like to convince me otherwise I'm open to being swayed, but none of those are about Halopedia period. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 23:14, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't Halopedia meet the criteria of

WP:WEB, since it's been mentioned in various sites, more specifically the developers of Halo franchise themselves? There's at least 135,000 Google hits, to add on. -5ub7ank^(7alk

) 04:34, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

To add on to what Subtank said, Halopedia has been repeatedly cited as a source for information for the Halo community, which isn't just limited to websites. Books citing Halopedia are listed on the Halopedia article on Halopedia, citations 2-7. Other than that, I've read

WP:WEB but I don't think I quite understand why this wouldn't satisfy the threshold for notability. The citings all appear valid to me. Nicmavr (talk

) 08:31, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't meet

WP:WEB. There have been no cited sources where Halopedia is the sole subject of an article, and they have not been awarded a major award, web or otherwise. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk

) 16:47, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't the following fulfil web?

1. Bungie.net (2006) - Informing of its existence.
2. Halo Effect (book) - cited Halopedia in its sources.
3. Interview - An interview with a former administrator of Halopedia.
4. Bungie.net (2009) - Bungie employee endorsing Halopedia as a reliable site for Halo knowledge, though as mere mention.
5. On Halo: Evolutions - Authors admittedly used Halopedia as reference during the development of
   Halo: Evolutions. It is also implied that the Halo Encyclopaedia (oddly enough, there's no Wikipedia article on that) referenced Halopedia, but that's another story
   .
6. Mobilizing Generations - Documented Halopedia as an example of successful wikis that garnered attention of the mass (youths, specifically).
7. Halo in PopCulture and Philosophy - Author cited Halopedia for his analyses.
8. Halo Waypoint - 343 Industries interviewed an administrator of Halopedia.

If being cited in numerous published works does not satisfy web, what does? — subtank ^(7alk) 19:37, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Again, you'll need direct mentions in reports/books about Halopedia. A mention on the equivalent of "there is also a fansite called Halopedia..." at the end of a news story on Bungie, for a hypothetical example, would not be considered deserving enough here to warrent an article. If, for instance, you had a news story actually centred around Halopedia, then we would appreciate it. I'm sure there are a few lying around, somewhere. :) -- OsirisV (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

The only news story that would satisfy the above would be #3 and #8; #3 is an iffy interview due to the nature of the reporting site, while #8 is an interview by 343 Industries but very, very brief. Also, wouldn't the fact that the developers/writers themselves used the site as reference make it notable? Mind you, these are not mere mentions; officials themselves actually used the wiki to produce the products for the franchise (#5).

Such content is very rare for a subject so common in such franchise unfortunately. Every press site that covered the Halo franchise is aware of the site's existence for the past six years (evident by mere mentioning, even jokingly referred

HBO and Halopedians as Halo fanatics), but none, to the best of my knowledge, ever want to actually cover about the site itself. It's such a common knowledge that it's just redundant. Guess that would always be the issue for such common knowledge. :P — subtank ^(7alk

) 20:57, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Xeon (emulator) has been prodded for deletion. Since this is a custom emulator for XBox Halo 1 to run on the PC, it might be merged somewhere into a Halo article. 65.95.13.213 (talk) 00:53, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

http://i.imgur.com/RHND3.png tell me what you think of this?Awsometilthegrave (talk) 14:43, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

It's still a rumor... if indeed it is going to be announced, then we don't have to wait for long. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:24, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I have started article on Forerunners and need your help in expanding it. I'm merging the content present in fraction with other available on the net. Thanx for your help in advance. ASHU^IND 11:22, 7 October 2011 (UTC) Making Halo Universe Alive

The Forerunner (Halo) article was merged into

Factions of Halo originally because there was not enough out-of-universe content about them--critical reception that confirmed their importance outside of the games. At this point, the article you've started falls short in similar respects. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk

) 17:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I've just begun writing it. Will expand it in few days. I need help regarding how I can add notes within wiki articles like quotes in Halo and all. ASHU^IND 07:07, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Now since Halo: Cryptum is released we have more detailed knowledge of the Forerunners in coordination with the data already available in Halo series. Hoping to write a complete article on them. ASHU^IND 13:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm not arguing that there's not enough in-universe information, I'm saying there isn't enough critical commentary from parties not affiliated with the games to justify it per

the general notability guideline. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk

) 15:43, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I've reopened the Halo: Cryptum article and started to expand it. Will appreciate help for referencing and reception. ASHU^IND 13:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Have started with Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary article. Would appreciate help and efforts from others. And please don't delete or redirect till article is complete. Thanks. ASHU^IND 09:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I have nominated

Just wondering why there doesn't seem to be an article here for this? Does it not meet Wikipedia's notability policy?--Spartacanus ^Talk 00:12, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

There's something weird going on at File:Master Chief in Halo 3.png. The original version is nominated for deletion as unused non-free. But the current version is about HALO 4 and not Halo 3. So the new upload should be removed as it is misleading. (Indeed, one wonders why a Halo 4 representation was uploaded at the Halo 3 filename). The file has undergone reversion twice. -- 76.65.131.248 (talk) 03:14, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

03:26, 27 September 2012‎ Juhachi (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (1,494 bytes) (0)‎ . . (Juhachi moved page File:Master Chief in Halo 3.png to File:Master Chief in Halo 4.png: As the image is now from Halo 4) (undo) -- file was moved after I made that comment -- 76.65.131.248 (talk) 04:13, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I read this article on the Signpost today so I decided to figure out the WikiWork for this project. I assumed it would be pretty good (lower numbers = less WikiWork) because we have a high number of good quality articles compared to our total scope. After dealing with the unassessed articles I came up with these figures using the tool.

• The total WikiWork ω = 123
• The relative WikiWork Ω = 2.278 (ω/number of articles)

This is exceptionally low, but of course there's always room for improvement. It's more of a curiosity for us because our scope is quite narrow and we can easily keep track of the articles. The larger WikiProjects can gain more meaningful statistics from it but I think it's still interesting nonetheless. James086^Talk 11:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

In this same vein, I have updated the projects article list. I think it should be examined to see if we want all of those articles in our scope, and then start killed off the non-GA's one by one . :) I'm game! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 14:43, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if Sotaro Tojima warrants an article. I don't think there is "significant coverage" as there is only one interview that is about him (Game Informer) rather than about the game he's working on at the time. I tried to expand the article but there's not too much available. Would someone mind taking a look for more sources so that we can demonstrate notability? The machinima articles are generally of poor quality, but I don't know if it's fair to remove them from our scope. They aren't covered by

To craft well-written and properly organized profiles for all relevant characters, races, technology, devices and other notable items in the Halo universe.

but then, neither is Bungie, 343 Industries, the people etc. because they don't fall within the Halo universe. I think that we should include them since they are Halo related. James086^Talk 16:02, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Haha, I was going to run this too as soon as I read the article. You guys beat me to it! As for Tojima, I'd say he doesn't merit an article, though I'll do another check for sources--I'm working on

Halo 4 OST, so something might turn up there. If not I'll merge to the 343 Industries article. As for the machinima, I see them as sort of tangental since they need to stand as independent products to be notable. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk

) 23:12, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit: Looking at the list there's a few articles that I'm unsure of their actual suitability as articles. I'll try and bring up some merge discussions when I've got the time/looked at them further. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 00:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I should have

Forward Unto Dawn up to GA shortly, also I agree that some articles don't appear notable. The Heretic (machinima) and Fire Team Charlie for example doesn't appear to have any secondary sources. I'll take a more in depth look for sources before I nominate for deletion. I'm also shocked that List of Halo multiplayer maps survived AFD. James086^Talk

20:50, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Why don't we make a Machinima inspired by Halo article? That way we could fold a lot of those stubs into one GA article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:45, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

List of Halo multiplayer maps should be deleted. I recommend nominating for deletion again. Also I feel number of the current GA Halo articles could do with some updating. The1337gamer (talk) 22:26, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I created

I'd agree with the above, and with renom'ing List of Halo maps for deletion. I... just don't see how that merits an article, and we're the fans. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 01:51, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Also nominated it for deletion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Halo multiplayer maps (2nd nomination). James086^Talk 18:16, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Another AFD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fire Team Charlie if anyone would like to comment. James086^Talk 16:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone have the Halo 4: Forward Unto Dawn DVD or Blu-ray? Apparently there are 3 commentaries over the film that provide info about filming which would be very useful for the article. I have neither a DVD nor Blu-ray player (physical media is so 2005). If anyone does have the film would they mind adding some info when they have time? James086^Talk 18:19, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Um, do you know if that stuff is exclusive to the physical media, or comes with the digital version that comes with the LE? I have the latter. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 01:53, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure. This doesn't mention it, but there is a lot of overlap of bonus content. I could always buy a DVD drive I suppose. :P James086^Talk 09:23, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Um, if you've got XBL I'd be happy to just give you the code for it so you can check (it's on a little card that came with the LE.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 14:12, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer but I'm living abroad temporarily (I normally reside in Australia) so I only have an ultrabook which has no DVD drive, let alone an Xbox or even a tv! I think I found enough info for GA at least, and have nominated it. I'll find a way to access the commentaries before a FAC. James086^Talk 15:15, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok I'll stick it in this weekend and see if there's anything we can use (it's an expanded cut at least so it should be interesting regardless :) Enjoy your time abroad. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:42, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary is by my estimation nearly ready for FAC--the only spot I think needs a bit more expansion is the audio section, some ref cleanup and archival, and some odds n' ends. If anyone has a chance to give it a look over in the next week or so to spot any other issues I might have missed or double-check the prose, that would be awesome. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:25, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Which date format do you prefer? I made all of the dates consistent with this script (see diff), but I'm not sure if you want to keep it that way. Feel free to revert. James086^Talk 09:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I've archived all of the refs save the 1up review [1] because it appears to be dead and the Wayback Machine doesn't already have copy. Also, something strange seems to be going on with the citation templates. For example ref 10 by Casey Lynch has an error saying that I haven't specified |archiveurl= when I have, I even copy/pasted it in case I had a typo but the error still appears. Also the archives aren't showing up linked in some refs like 59 by Matt Miller. If you check the wikicode, the archive is there. Strange. James086^Talk 11:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I figured out the solution, I had added |archiveurl=www.foo.com|archivedate=today without removing the empty |archiveurl=|archivedate= which meant that it just didn't display any archive information when formatted. James086^Talk 12:02, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Well I usually like the raw 2013-03-14 format myself, but if they're all consistent I don't much care :P Thanks for hitting up the rest of the refs. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:42, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

We need to decide whether our scope includes these articles that have been categorized under Halo;

I made a table to simplify it a little, I think slipstream should definitely be within our scope. I don't see a problem with accepting the others as Halo articles, they do relate to Halo, despite not being official. However, all of the "RvB other articles" have minimal, if any, out-of-universe content, there's lots of work needed on them (if there are indeed reviews available). I think Matt Leto is notable [2][3][4], but I have my doubts about Corporeal; Kotaku isn't a reliable source and they appear to be notable only for a single event. James086^Talk 17:13, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The benefit of taking them would be that once Fire Team and some of the others, including most of the Red vs Blue articles are checked, most will have to be deleted or merged, so we would probably only be on boarding about 7-9 articles total.Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I didn't mean to imply that we shouldn't accept them because they need work, that would be lazy in my opinion. However, I do agree that much of the RvB stuff will be either deleted or merged because I don't see many sources for the miniseries articles. I suggest we tag everything with the talkpage banner and then clean it up to WP:HALO standards which may involve deletion or merging. I won't just do this unilaterally though, I'd like to hear others' thoughts too. James086^Talk 13:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Nope, no lazy people here! :) Judt gotta clean them to our standard. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 13:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

IF we do take on these articles, Slipstream will need a page one rewrite, the red vs blue character list should be changed to an article, and all the rest of the Red vs. Blue articles (except the main one) should be merged to one

List of Red vs. Blue media article, because they all have basically no notability as individual seasons. Judgesurreal777 (talk

) 23:36, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I've tagged them all as ours, if that's too bold of me, someone can just revert (easiest way would be to check my contribs as of the timestamp on this comment). Over the next week or so I'll get started on

List of Red vs. Blue media. James086^Talk

20:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

edit | discuss

Bungie

9 articles

Halo.Bungie.Org

Martin O'Donnell

Luke Smith (writer)

List of Bungie video games

Jason Jones (programmer)

Joseph Staten

Alex Seropian

Michael Salvatori

All the articles are Good Articles now, a pipe dream just a few years ago! Do we think this would fly? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:28, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps "Bungie personnel" would be a better title otherwise all of their games should be included, but I say go for it. James086^Talk 08:10, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

The nomination is started! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:26, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

A user has requested that a List of Bungie video games be created and added to the topic. I personally have no experience making list, could someone start one up for us? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:03, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Nevermind, I got ambitious and made one! It's really rough though, and if everyone could pitch in, we could nominate it to be featured for our Bungie topic! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:34, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I've filled in a lot of the info needed, another set of eyes would certainly help though. James086^Talk 15:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

So I've been wondering what to do about

My proposal is to follow a strategy I used for The Myst Reader and since the books neatly combine into the marketed-as "Forerunner Saga", merge the articles together into one, I guess under the aforementioned name. Thoughts? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 14:13, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

There could definitely be a Forerunner Saga article, the only question is what happens to our brand new Cryptum GA. If we do this, we should all work together and try for an FA run so we don't lose ground, and no feelings are hurt :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Well the GA is your fault not mine :P I didn't ever think there was enough info to get The Myst Reader to FA, but I think there's a lot more little stuff (as well as a stronger individual claim to fame for each book.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:47, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Funny guys Fuchs :) I do agree with you, the articles could each be pushed and prodded to GA but thats about as far as they will go, unless they get real popular in the future, and I'd rather have one FA. I believe your right, we should build the Forerunner Saga article, and then redirect books 2 and 3, and then see about book one. Is that plan acceptable? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:00, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan! I should have a lot more time coming next week. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 21:12, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Me too! Perhaps we should make a template first. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:09, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Lol, where'd that week go a year later? :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:21, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I know right? :) do you think we could relaunch this idea? If you help merge it, I will help bulk it up so it's a stong GA and then perhaps FA later. Thoughts? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Well! I tried to delete this article, everyone said it might be notable, so I pulled that string and it is now a GA! I'm probably going to keep working on the various sub GA Halo articles, but I'm hoping we can also reactivate a few things, like pushing Halo 4 to GA to revive the Good Topic, creating a featured Forerunner Trilogy article, and creating a List of Red vs Blue Media. Lets keep going! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:12, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Nicely done. I created

List of Red vs. Blue media, unfortunately I'm still really pressed for time so my progress is sslloooowww. I have no objection to the Cryptum article being merged into a larger, better article for the trilogy overall, I'll certainly help with that if I can find the time. James086^Talk

20:36, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Well I'm not going to merge them until I find the time to write it, but the very beginning is in my sandbox at User:David Fuchs/draft. Hopefully CEA will pass the FAC gauntlet soon, then I can focus on some other FA projects and turn some attention to Spartan Assault (since it'll be releasing soon) and Halo 4. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 14:49, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

I merged all of the seasons into

pretty but it's been done. Next I think I'll try to help with the forerunner books. James086^Talk

15:06, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Your comment is requested at Template talk:Infobox video game#Use of Wikidata. Thanks. --Izno (talk) 03:49, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Do we have an article on the MS project under development, "Cortana", the WinPhone/RT/8 competitor to Apple Siri? -- 65.92.181.39 (talk) 03:57, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Not to my knowledge, but I'm not sure an article is merited until it's a shipping product with extensive coverage. On the Halo note, just because it's named after a character probably wouldn't put it under our scope. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, there is currently a discussion taking place at

• Halo Original Soundtrack
• This Spartan Life

If you have objections related specifically to WikiProject Halo's use of these subpages, please make this clear at the discussion so that other unrelated talk pages can be cleaned up where appropriate. Thank you. -Thibbs (talk) 15:52, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I have created a new portal at