User talk:T1g4h

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] RE: GTA:SA

I'm sure I can find some: [1] is a good place to look, but I found the other one whilst replaying GTA the other day. EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME | IMPROVEME 11:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SA mythos

Some of the information if the articles, i feel, seems very irrelevant, and is also sometimes stated in more than 2 sections. For example, i see nei significance in the fact that EGM referred too bigfoot as 'Yeti', it is just a different name for the creature based off of Tibetan legends, which we culturally link.

The mentions of /'flying orbs' are already explained previously in the article, and they are mentioned twice in this one but say 'Rockstar has said nothing about the flying orbs.'

1st mentions:"but in reality Rockstar used the same style to visualize commercial air traffic in Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (bright lights, contrails, etc)", "Rockstar has said, however, that these UFO sightings are merely bad airplane lighting effects"

2nd mention: "Rockstar has said nothing about the flying orbs."(opposing sentence to the previous one)

3rd mention:"Rockstar has not said anything about the orbs, and its intentions with them are still unclear." again a repeat , and a possibly falsified statement.

The same occurs with the 'map' being mentioned:

1st mention: "Fans initially thought the map was a key to the UFO appearances; however, Rockstar Games claims the map means nothing."

2nd mention: "Many people think that the mysterious map (see above) depicts the locations of UFO's, but Rockstar claims that the map means nothing."

Also, this statement is clearly false(which leads the whole paragraph encompassing it to be dissolved:

"One of the most speculated locations of UFO's is the Area 69 base in the desert, where UFO's can be seen flying around."

this statement is also taken out of context it seems: "There are also flying silver orbs that frequent the San Andreas skies." they arent silver, they are dim, lighted circles in the sky that are used to simulate airplane lights.

Yeah, no problem. :) i just wanted to get 'the truth out there', so to speak, and i too was really into that stuff for a while but realized nothing was what it seemed--r9tgokunks 02:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit warring and Cars articles

The current edit war on various Cars articles isn't serving any good purpose. It might be good if everyone took a step back and tried to resolve the dispute via discussion instead of continuing to revert. Several editors, including yourself, seem to have violated WP:3RR, and that is likely to result in blocks (though I'm not sure exactly how that particular process works). FYI, I'm not singling you out. I'm posting similar messages to several parties because I'd just like to see the dispute end. --Fru1tbat 02:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd love to see it end too. In my edit summaries, I've frequently requested people check the discussion page, to no avail. They simply ignored them and reverted without checking to see what evidence I had brought up. If I get blocked, so be it. When I get unblocked, I'll happily resume editing where I left off. If you can convince them to check the discussion page though, I'd be grateful. T1g4h 02:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I hope everyone will be willing to talk about it. For what it's worth, I agree that Wingo looks more like a Civic, but I don't think the diecast model pictures are big enough (or clear enough) to be of much use in determining it for sure. The official site has a "showroom" feature [2] where there's a large rendered shot of Wingo, but it's only the front end, and it's part of a flash applet, so the image can't be referenced directly. Movie screenshots from various angles might be good to have. I don't have the DVD yet, so I can't capture any myself. --Fru1tbat 02:52, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Aye, i've looked at the showroom feature, but it wasn't of much use. And sadly, those were the largest shots of the front and rear I could find. If I can get my DVD drive working again, i'll have a quick run through the film and snag screenshots from various angles for the rest of the crew as well, since I'm highly skeptical of Boost being a '94 Eclipse. T1g4h 02:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Would you agree that the current entry is most beneficial to both sides until a definitive answer comes along?Skywatcher68 19:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

If you mean the ambiguous import tuner parody one, sure :P Tho now someone has changed The Delinquent Road Hazards so it says Civic in 2 places and 240SX hatchback in another XDT1g4h 01:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)