Jump to content

Talk:Half-Life (series)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Predator106 (talk | contribs) at 02:25, 25 August 2009 (→‎Breen). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

More Information

I think the Half-Life series article should include more complete facts, such as dates of release, sales, and critical reception. 67.172.204.135 13:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of a Weapons List

I noticed a red-link in the Combine (Half-Life 2) article. Combine Standard Issue Pulse Rifle, to be specific, We need a weapons list for either the entire series, or each individual game. Black Mercy 21:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A recent precedent has removed all weapon lists I believe. If you see any red links to weapons, feel free to remove them. Qjuad 06:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Episode Four?

Since Ep4 has been announced, why isn't it listed here? 82.117.101.124 19:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it wont be called Ep4 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.233.247.10 (talk) 00:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Half life.

I agree with the comments above, about having more complete facts would be good. I noticed half life shown on a TV show, Lost season 1, Ep 21, near the beggining of the show.. just for some information for other people in case some one wants to use this data. Jessycormier 20:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portal

I could be mistaken, but as far as I know, Portal has not been given a confirmed place within the Half-Life series time-line, so it seems wrong to place it in the "Half-Life 2 era". Although perhaps HL2:Ep3 will shed more light on this. --Beeurd 00:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can find evidence of this in Portal itself (references to Black Mesa), the Portal "hacked" site, and Aperture Science is refered to at one point in Episode 2. The link is also mentioned in several interviews with personnel at Valve, so it seems to be a pretty firm tie in to me. 38.112.96.194 20:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Races merge

The following fail WP:FICT and should be merged: Race X, Tentacle (Half-Life), Nihilanth, Ichthyosaur (Half-Life), Headcrab, Gonarch, Gargantua (Half-Life), Carnivorous_Leech, Bullsquid, Black Ops (Half-Life), Houndeye, Barnacle (Half-Life), Alien Grunt, Alien Controller, Hazardous Environment Combat Unit and Antlion (Half-Life 2) --David Fuchs (talk) 19:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merged info is now here. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 21:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why does HECU Redirect here?

Why was the HECU page removed and instead HECU redirects here? I thought the former page was fine. Besides, this article makes no mention of the HECU, what they are, or what role they play. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.122.97 (talk) 04:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I agree, when they moved all the races into 1 talk page, they forgot the HECU page. Not only that, but without the HECU page, someone needs to edit all the articles and replace "HECU" with "Marines". I would do it, but I'm using a shared IP (this IP is used on about 100+ computers throughout the building) and somebody got it banned. So I can't edit until I get an account (It's on my to-do list).204.14.12.35 (talk) 14:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dog

I'm wondering why all the characters listed in the expandable section on Half-Life have their own page, except Dog? His (its) link redirects to the Half-Life 2 page (specifically the section on technology). While I am a Dog fan, Wikipedia should either have a page about him or remove him from the "important characters" section. As far as his importance to the plot goes, it falls somewhere between Huey Dewey and Louie from Silent Running and See-Threepio and Artoo DeeToo from Star Wars. 24.243.102.5 (talk) 03:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Ease of Navigation and Continuity

I tried to find out some info about the Half-Life series a while ago, and found it quite difficult to navigate Wikipedia on this subject. This was partly due to the fact that few (or none) of the pages list here (the Half-Life (series) page). This means that there is no continuous thread or common link between all these pages. I wanted to add it to "see allso" , but I think its important enough to rather be worked into all of the introductions of these pages. Thus one could find your way about Half-Life through this page. =GeiwTeol 23:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Editing Half Life"

I deleted the horrendous "Editing Half Life" section. I don't know who wrote it, but it was terrible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Viper (talk • contribs) 23:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to add the {{Half-Life}} navbox to any Half-Life related article that doesn't have it already. --Geniac (talk) 13:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Half-Life Cover Art.jpg

The image Image:Half-Life Cover Art.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --10:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural Impact section should be changed or outright removed.

First off, trivia sections are discouraged. Furthermore, this is one of the most influential and innovative video games and works of science fiction and all there is in that section is a low budget unauthorized film? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.107.95.52 (talk) 07:49, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's hardly trivia, it has four sources. Removing it won't do a lot of good. Maybe you can expand it? Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 16:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As Daragon states, its not trivia, its a sourced example of impact with fans. Yes, more is needed, but that is no reason to remove this one, which is here as a consequence of a merge result in a recent AfD. Currently this article is little more than a disambiguation page, but there are plans to expand it to meet higher quality series articles such as Halo series and StarCraft series, providing full development and impact information. -- Sabre (talk) 10:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge headcrab into this article

The article headcrab has multiple issues, is unreferenced and crufty. Since the same thing happened with Metroid (creature), I suggest that the article be shortened and merged here as a recurring enemy.--ZXCVBNM (TALK) 00:40, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose any merge. This one's the more iconic and will be the more widely commented of the Half-Life creatures, I know there's several points of analysis in PC Gamer UK for a start. The lesser commented on Half-Life species, Vortigaunt and Combine (Half-Life) (which looked little different to the current version of headcrab before I cleaned them up), prove that it these articles can survive alone (regardless of whatever Metroid does, which is irrelevant anyway), even if Vortigaunt is a little lacking in design info at the moment. I was rather hoping that after doing those two articles, someone else might try headcrab, but merging it is the entirely wrong way to go about it, especially as this rather WIP article is meant to cover the products, not the fiction. I've been slowly cleaning my way through the Half-Life series in recent months, I will endeavour to fix up the article when I have a moment. -- Sabre (talk) 00:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the article can probably stand on its own, so I oppose this merge, too. Gary King (talk) 02:36, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Film Adaption

Has there ever been any section written on the speculation of a movie? I'm not saying that we should put in anything that would fall under WP:Crystal but there have been many articles published on the proposed film adaption. I would normally be against it but I read Halo's film speculation section Halo_(series)#Film and found that it was well done and highly sourced. To be more specific, there was an interview conducted with Gabe Newell (of Valve) where he explains the current state of a film being made. I personally think it's important to note. OlYellerTalktome 03:00, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a link? Gary King (talk) 03:08, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should Not Be Redirected To The Series Aricle

Haipa Doragon's redirecting of this article to the Half-Life series article is rash and hinders the growth of a long confirmed game of a highly reputable company. Valve itself has confirmed Half Life 2: Episode Three's existence and since the game is listed as a Primary Video Game on the Valve Task Force page, it should continue to warrant it's own article. This article has seen drastic improvements and has gone through numerous iterations in the last year or so: weeding out false information, removing user-made logos, unverifiable rumors, and endless speculation and it should continue to do so as long as there is a notable interest in the game.

"A stub will be seen and improved, a missing article is less likely to be created if you, the person who sees the need, fails to create it. So better create a stub than leave a gap."

--Andrew James Richards (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Currently there is little known information so the article cannot currently be expanded beyond a stub. Rehevkor ✉ 20:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is common practice on Wikipedia to merge articles with little content to "parent" articles, such as the series article for this, where need be. This is an issue of style, not notability, and the coverage at Half-Life (series) is sufficient for now. Whether or not future information may turn up for the subject is irrelevant, as it has no bearing on the current iteration of the article. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 21:14, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Considering all I did when I wrote the paragraph for EP3 in this article was copy and paste the prose of the EP3 article itself, its not exactly like anything's been lost. It will get spun out again when there's actually enough information for a proper article to develop and sustain itself; as said, this is a style issue, no-one disputes the notability or existance of EP3. -- Sabre (talk) 22:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand and agree now. I apologize for my, err... forcefulness. --Andrew James Richards (talk) 22:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry about it. Just be wary of consensus and the three-revert rule, though. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 23:50, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In an attempt reach consensus, there is further discussion on the issue here. Rehevkor ✉ 00:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Breen

The plot summary states that Breen is dead, but this may not be true- he could still be alive, since it is never explicitly stated that he died. AYoungMan68 (talk) 04:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its never explicitly stated he's alive, so its probably better to keep it that he's dead until otherwise shown without a doubt. Nevertheless, I've changed the wording to "presumed dead" in the interest of compromise; other characters in the game think he's dead, regardless. -- Sabre (talk) 12:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*other characters in the game think he's dead, regardless.

That doesn't mean anything, they thought Gordon was dead too..he isn't :p

Did EA really take over publishing in 2005?

I was pretty sure Valve self-published for a few years and EA only started publishing in 2008. Smurfy 20:21, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Half-Life_(series)&oldid=309899050"