Talk:Covenant (Halo)

Untitled

Archived discussion on the Grunts can be found here.
Archived discussion on vehicles can be found here.

Question

Is The Fall of Reach a novel that is set before the events of Halo: Combat Evolved? If not, what is it? hbdragon88 09:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, a ref shows that it is a novel. Could it stated in the text somewhere that it is a novel to make the perspective more out-of-universe? hbdragon88 09:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Nobleambitions-It is a novel, written by Eric Nylund and is set AFTER Halo 1, and BEFORE Halo 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.180.191.60 (talk) 15:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Uh, no. Fall of Reach is not set after Halo 1. The whole point behind the novel is that it covers the destruction of Reach, which takes place prior to the first Halo game. Peptuck (talk) 19:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

First Strike takes place between 1 and 2 and covers the destruction of the Unyielding Heirophant and Chief's return to earth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.30.161 (talk) 18:40, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Canon order: Contact Harvest, Cole Protocol, Fall of Reach, Halo and The Flood (Both set at same time), First Strike, Ghosts of Onyx, Halo 2, Halo 3. 92.4.164.217 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 01:20, 28 December 2008 (UTC).

Ghosts of Onyx extends from before Halo 1 and Fall of Reach up through Halo 2 (the activation of the Shield World is a result of the aborted activation of Delta Halo). However, you are correct that most of the events take place after First Strike, as Dr. Halsey takes Kelly before the attack on the Unyielding Hierophant. 24.104.128.78 (talk) 19:40, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Merger of Covenant vehicles

It seems unlikely that the vehicles article can stand on its own in terms of referencing and notability, so it should be merged in here. Judgesurreal777 23:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Peptuck 00:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Also agreed, and I'm doing it within 24 hours unless someone objects. Equazcion •✗/C • 14:54, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay so I did it now. Hope no one was planning on objecting. Equazcion •✗/C • 15:04, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

To-do for this article

I'd really like to get this up to FA at some point. Way I see it, these are what we should try and do:

• cut down on plot- try and shrink everything in 'appearances' to 1-2 paragraphs, max.
• needs a reception section; this might be a little hard to find, but at least there's plenty of merchandise to write about.
• Species: ugh. Long, but splitting it off into a seperate article seems like a bad idea. How about we try for a two paragaph format for each (besides the Elites, they have their own page); one paragraph of in-universe, followed by creation or comments on the species in general; stuff like designs for the species in The Art of Halo, etc.

Thoughts? David Fuchs ^(talk) 01:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

The species system definitely could be shunted into its own article, or at least trimmed; that and some trimming of the rest of the article would do the job, I think. What do you think we could put into Reception, though? Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 01:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

That's what would be the hardest part of the article; Searching for 'halo covenant reception' and the like turns up only general reviews. But I don't think the article can stand as well without it. David Fuchs ^(talk) 01:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be difficult to do a general reception for the article, as I'm guessing that different species got different reactions (for example, the flying guys were annoying while hunters presented a challenge). I'll try to look around for some reviewers who talk about the covenant. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 01:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

No, it should focus more on 'appearances' more than anything else.-teh n00b. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.164.25.208 (talk) 20:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Species split?

I'm ready to devote some time to grabbing the out of universe details for the Covenant, and it seems to make more sense (as much as I loath splitting articles) to spin off the species into something like Species of the Covenant or something along those lines. It will streamline this article much more, and I feel that there is enough real-world info for all the Covenant so that WP:FICT concerns won't be a problem. Thoughts? David Fuchs ^(talk) 22:33, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

But wouldn't that leave us with a simmilar dillema on the new article? - Caribbean~H.Q. 23:06, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

How so? David Fuchs ^(talk) 23:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Won't we end up with another article with no out of universe material? - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Hardly. I can throw in the Art of Halo design influences for the Brutes, the Halo 3 vidoc, Joseph Staten commenting on how weird it is to play a game populated by enemy 'hims' and gunning them down, et al. I'll prolly draft it in userspace before I commit to a split, but I'm pretty certain we can make a decent article of it. David Fuchs ^(talk) 02:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I might be able to help with it since I expect to be more active next month, cheers. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Something

I deleted:

     Critical impact
     Merchandise
     Critical reception

Because they contained nothing at all, feel free to add them back in with info included. AP Shinobi (talk) 17:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Group shot?

Can someone find an image featuring most of the Covenant together? (Elites aren't a concern as they have their own article.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 12:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Theres no ingame shot and any image would be made by bingie for that single purpose or photoshoped.--Jakezing (talk) 03:59, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Red vs Blue

Should their appearance in the new animated series be put in after some more information is acquired? For a more knowledgeable and relaxed Wikipedia- Nemesis646 (talk) 12:50, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Not so sure their use in a machinima work (even a notable and influential one) is really worth the mention. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 15:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Would that be better on RvB's page (once more info is released)? For a more knowledgeable and relaxed Wikipedia- Nemesis646 (talk) 18:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I suppose... but is it really that important? (RvB had Covenant models before.) --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 18:50, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Odd Sentence

"According to Paul Russel, when Bungie was bought by Microsoft and Halo was turned into an Xbox launch title, Microsoft took issue with the design of the Elites, as they felt that the Elites had a resemblance to cats that might alienate Japanese consumers.[10]"

Someone should explain as to why a feline resemblance would alienate the Japanese. The reason is not stated and will probably confuse most people. Occamsrazorwit (talk) 00:00, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

It's not really explained. It's just what the source says (I dunno why either.) --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 00:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Covenant (Halo)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

GA Sweeps: Kept

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good Article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2007. I tagged the image to be reduced in size. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would be beneficial to update the access dates for all of the sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:32, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Mgalekgolo

can somebody stop changing the name Mgalekgolo to Lekgolo? Mgalekgolo is the name of the Hunter form while Lekgolo is the name of the individual worms. (1AiRHeAd3 (talk) 23:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC))

Mgalekgolo is the individual worm lekgolo is a colony Alertfiend (talk) 08:51, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Splits of the Covenant

Shouldn't the article be split into different sections for each faction that would later come into being once the Covenant split? As gathered from halopedia, four major groups emerged throughout the storyline. Originally, there is the Covenant Empire in which all species are a part of the group, including the elites. This group spawned the heretics at the start of Halo 2, which are essentially elites and grunts who know the prophets are liars and the Covenant religion is false. They are pretty much quelled in the first few levels of Halo 2, and integrate with the two sides that come into being after the Covenant Empire splits into the Covenant Separatists, and the Covenant Loyalists. The Covenant Separatists consist of elites, grunts (not in the games) and hunters (also not in the games), and are those that followed the elites after the prophets and brutes attempted genocide on the elites. The Covenant Loyalists are those still faithful in the Covenant religion, and are made up of the grunts, hunters, brutes, prophets, and drones. So since there are four distinct groupings, shouldn't the article be split into four main parts? If so, this will also need to change the other Halo articles. Sounds like a good task for those who are part of the Halo wikipedia group. Blade bane (talk) 10:36, 26 November 2009 (UTC)Blade bane

Merging Elite (Halo)

Much of the content in that article is redundant with what should be discussed here, and most of the reception should be put here too. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(">talk) 19:20, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

my tips

Always bust through the grunts.For the Hunters you'd think:"Ahh!! Run for your lives!!" But,the easy way to take them down is to hide somewhere safe,then when they walk past you...jump out and shoot them.The back is their weak spot.Also,in forge world,and forge world variants on Halo:Reach, they're is a hidden canyon.First,get a jetpack and go to the beach on the east side the jetpack to the other beach accross the water,then,through the tunnel is a huge canyon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.52.74.233 (talk) 23:01, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Major issues

• The "Cultural impact" section should be renamed into "Reception".
• "Reception" is extremely poor, as it has 3 citations.
• The "Merchandise" sub-section should be removed unless more sources proving that the "likeness of the characters has been used extensively on merchandise."
• The "External links" section should only include the websites of the games that the Covenant have appeared in, not their entry on wikis, as wikis are inappropriate links and fan-written unreliable sources full of original research.

Here's a link to WikiProject Video games' article guidelines; check the "For characters" bit. Hula Hup (talk) 14:22, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Writing Style of "History of the Alliance" Section

The "History of the Alliance" section of this article contains an extensive number of grammatical errors. For reference, I have enclosed a sample here. "The Alliance's history begins with the meeting between the San 'Shyuum and Shangheili two alien species. Both species enter the war. The latter ends with the discovery of artifacts Forerunners , an ancient race since disappeared, the San 'Shyuum worship to deification. This period of war was called the Age of Abandonment." I believe that this should be corrected as follows. "The Alliance's history begins with the first encounter between two alien species, the San 'Shyuum and the Shangheili. The two species go to war with each other in a conflict that ends with the discovery of artifacts from the Forerunners, an ancient race long since disappeared from the galaxy. The San 'Shyuum begin to worship the Forerunners to deification. This period of war was called the Age of Abandonment." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markc113 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Covenant (Halo). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090203173816/http://download.microsoft.com/download/4/d/c/4dcc4b82-fee5-4570-b28f-b573a1ad1631/Bungie_Podcast_082108.mp3 to http://download.microsoft.com/download/4/d/c/4dcc4b82-fee5-4570-b28f-b573a1ad1631/Bungie_Podcast_082108.mp3
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100520061954/http://www.ign.com/videogame-villains/26.html to http://www.ign.com/videogame-villains/26.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:17, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Hunters

I think that the hunters' section should have some more info. There are some questions that go unanwsered. I will give some examples just to prove my point. Why do the hunters help the covenant? Why did they leave the covenant to help the elites and the Arbitor? Why do the hunters help brutes and other halo dwelling aliens? That is just my thought. For the sake of peoples' halo information, please add more details to that certain section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.69.183.48 (talk) 17:20, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Covenant (Halo)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Unfortunately the article does not meet the GA criteria. With a cleanup banner at the top of the article and 19 citation needed tags, it cannot remain a GA unless these issues are remedied. (H/t to ‎45.119.84.59 who brought this issue to my attention). (t · c) buidhe 01:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree with demoting the article. It can be temporary until someone figures out a way to address the issues. Shooterwalker (talk) 14:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

The outstanding citation tags make it unsuitable to be a GA; ping me if this is fixed. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:14, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Buidhe it would be helpful if you observed the actual procedures for GAR and notified major contributors when starting a GAR. I only noticed this GAR through WP:VG it's obnoxious to only find out via that. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 16:16, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• @Buidhe, Shooter, Piotrus, and David Fuchs: How is this going. It looks like work has gone into fixing the issues. Aircorn (talk) 04:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

  Citations have been added, but in all honesty I have major concerns regarding the notability of this topic. Ping few people for sanity check before this ends up at AfD: @Jclemens, Daranios, Rorshacma, TTN, and Avilich:. Even if it does go to AfD the reception section needs a major beefing up if we don't want this stuck with {{Notability}} - which would make it ineligible for GA status anyway... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:47, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

  I don't think an AFD would succeed for notability concerns, since there are a couple of decent sources that I think would at least allow the subject to pass the bare minimum of the WP:GNG. But, I agree that the "Reception" section is pretty terrible to the point of its inclusion being actually detrimental to the quality of the article. It really misrepresents how much coverage there actually is in the cited sources, as these are mostly just reviews of the games that just very briefly mention the Covenant as part of the overall discussion of the game. One of these (the Edge review) never even mentions them by name, simply calling them "enemies", and the article on the Guiness ranking has absolutely no information on them, simply listing their name in a list. Rorshacma (talk) 17:13, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

  By all means, listing the sources would make things easier for me as I improve the section. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 22:23, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

  Thanks for the ping, but I am not a content expert on first person shooters in general, and have no particular expertise in sourcing. In general, I oppose any AfD on a good or featured article, since the community has already reviewed it at least once, it deserves the chance to remove that imprimatur, and THEN an XfD can be held if it does remove the designation. I've heard arguments that something can pass GA and still be deleted at XfD, but I've never heard one that I found even somewhat compelling. Jclemens (talk) 17:34, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

  Notability and quality are two separate issues as you can write a high quality article on a non-notable subject. Notability is not reviewed as part of a GAN and Good Articles have been deleted at AFD with no issue regarding their GA status. So if you think it is non-notable this is not a barrier. Aircorn (talk) 21:08, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

  @Jclemens Take a look at Talk:Halo Array, a GA that is right now 100% plotcruft with zero reception/significance... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:21, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

  @Piotrus, it is interesting to look at the history behind how that article was assessed as a GA in the first place. Haleth (talk) 00:22, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

  That was brought to my attention too. Maybe some of these peripheral articles should be merged together. Aircorn (talk) 02:28, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

  From a search for sources, I found some that prove the Covenant's notability beyond a doubt.

  • Full article explaining all Covenant races from a reliable source
  • "The Sacred & the Digital: Critical Depictions of Religions in Video Games" page 165 - Cites the Covenant as a clear reference to Christianity and gives examples of how their name relates to it
  • "Reframing 9/11 - Film, Popular Culture and the "War on Terror"" page 100 - Cites the Covenant invading Earth in Halo 2 as an intentional parallel for America invading the Middle East.

  That alone is definite proof even though there are certainly more out there. So the issue is not notability but really poor sourcing used in the article. It should probably be demoted back to C-class and undergo GAR again after it is rewritten/incorporates these sources. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:06, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

• Merge to Factions of Halo and demote if not. The sourcing only has depth on in-universe context and does not cover the independent, external notability of the topic. Honestly all of the recurring factions should be upmerged to Halo (series) and then split out to something like the dedicated Factions article when warranted by summary style overgrowth. Per Piotr and Aircorn above, this question of notability is assessed independently from the quality assessment criteria. Even considering Zxcvbnm's sources above, I don't see the depth to support a dedicated article witout delving into in-universe trivia, which is the state of the current article. I'd suggest taking a stab at merging this content where it already belongs in summary style and only then evaluating what a dedicated article provides that isn't already covered in the merged section. The merge discussion should happen on the talk page (and notify WT:VG), not in this GAR. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 18:40, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

  @Czar: -- done. -- Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 02:49, 13 May 2022 (UTC)