Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
The english in the older versions of this article was already good enough and far better than what it is now. Now the article is full of spelling mistakes and other errors. Why the hell did you have to go and mess it all up??
- So you have to choose: better merit content or better language. Thanks for your comments, however:
- you will be welcome, if you make some corrections there or at least describe it here (you are a native speaker, aren't you?),
- it would be more polite to sign your name here like this: - - ~ ~ ~ ~ (necessary marks separated with spaces).
--dotz 06:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, not all of the editors of the wiki are native speakers of English or speak English at a native-like level. And those that do are too busy to correct all mistakes. But of course you're welcome to help us by doing just that. :) Ausir 09:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- At least one the Vault quality standard was defined - correct english, however vast part of the questioned article are quotations. I do not dare to change them. I tried to correct the rest.--dotz 09:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Doubts concerning presence in gameEdit
- J.E. Sawyer’s New Canaan design document was cancelled and changed into Jericho design document with no references concerning Graham. New Canaan was Graham’s homeland (Sawyer's departure issue).
- Sawyer's Burham Springs design document is the only other van Buren document, where Graham is mentioned as CNPC.
- S.K. Reynolds at Blackfoot design document gives information concerning Hanged Man as examples only.
- There is no bounty for Grahams head in Hoover Dam. There were punished such crimes as assault, slavery act, assasination attempt or murder, rape and theft. Most chased offenders were connected with distant locations, eg. Kyle the Hook - Bloomfield, Ingmar - the Reservation (not present at the Reservation design document), Craig - Blackfoot village, Miguel Vargas - Denver or Ryan Mitchell - Jericho (not present at Jericho design document),
- Denver and the Reservation design documents don't refer Hanged Man relations with encountered Caesar's Legion members (description possible at Fort Abandon design document).
- Hanged Man was not mentioned in van Buren 8 CNPC’s files (Alexandra, Beatrice, CRBS, Devil Dog, Job, Kurisu, Measles and Otto Stead). However kumquat's leaks also mention the Hanged Man alongside Alexandra and 8 CNPC, but different than in the design documents. Number of eight CNPCs was confirmed by Jeff Husges and Damien Foletto at Interplay forums.
- There are some similarities between Hanged Man and Alexandra, jack of all trades, as good in fight as in healing, another NPC with New Canaan background, including destruction of this town (again: kumquat's leaks mention the Hanged Man alongside Alexandra).
Hanged Man "negative" sourcesEdit
- Denver design document by Sean K. Reynolds
- Hoover Dam design document and Reservation design document by Damien Foletto
- Jericho design document by Jeff Husges
The "doubts concerning presence in the game" section is IMHO entirely unnecessary. Van Buren was an unfinished game, so not all NPCs mentioned in one place as being in another actually are in the other place's docs, because the docs were being written by different people and a lot of that would've been fixed during the level design itself, without adding them to even the final versions of docs. There is no such thing as a final version of VB. And kumquat's leaks also mention the Hanged Man alongside Alexandra. There being only 8 CNPCs is not necessarily correct - again, in the kumquat leaks there are also 8 of them, but different than in the docs. And the Hanged Man was probably detailed in the lost Fort Abandon doc, since he was going to be found there. I moved it to the talk page instead. Ausir 23:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
The fact that the character was not included in a design doc is not a proof that he wasn't included in the game. Anyway, for me the "final" or "canon" version is the point of Sawyer's departure from Interplay. After that, the design mostly consisted of cutting the game down to meet deadlines. There are other important characters and themes in one doc that aren't mentioned in another only because the designers writing the two docs didn't discuss the influence of their respective locations with each other yet. E.g. Presper is not mentioned in many of the design docs but it doesn't mean there is doubt of his existence. It's just that the Hanged Man was detailed the most in the lost Fort Abandon document and wasn't properly incorporated into most other documents yet at that point. He's included in docs written by Sawyer but not the others not because he was cut (or at least there is IMHO no evidence to that), but because he would probably be incorporated into the design of the other locations at a later stage. Ausir 10:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- There was no final version of van Buren, but some ideas were more final then others - the "final" or "canon" version is the point of Sawyer's departure from Interplay - very important piece of knowledge about game development (it wasn't expressed earlier openly).
- Presper is not a good example - he have to be present; think rather about his helpers - Maj. Briggs and Cap. Davidson - present at BOMB 1 only, not in Grand Canyon and Boulder (however Briggs was background character also).
- I have to recall kumquat's revelations on NMA, however Hanged Man cut-off supposition/conclusion was created on NMA forums, when 8 CNPC docs were published.
- Thx Ausir. I like this wiki, your knowledge and your emotions, when it goes to define "final" or "canon" version of van Buren.--dotz 11:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
[...]the "final" or "canon" version is the point of Sawyer's departure from Interplay. After that, the design mostly consisted of cutting the game down to meet deadlines. - The time problem (according to NMA history and design documents):
- 29 of August 2003: a date on New Canaan design document.
- 15 of September 2003: Incorporated elements of New Canaan into the newly-christened town of Jericho. Turned Jericho into a stand-alone place (by Jeff Husges).
- 7 of November 2003: J.E. Sawyer announces that he's leaving Bis.
- 21 of November 2003: Josh Sawyer leaves Bis and VB.
- 9 of December 2003: Bis is closed.
So New Canaan was canceled before Sawyer's leaving. I supposse rather (or mainly) financial problems/short deadlines caused cut-offs (however remuneration problems/IPLY financial troubles could be reason for Sawyer's leaving, then all deadlines couldn't be kept and BIS was finally disbanded - nice case study).--dotz 13:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Background character Edit
Removed the bg character category and template, since he was going to appear in VB as a major NPC. Ausir 12:48, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Hints for cleanup? Bolded things are just quotated.--dotz 06:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Here. Probably could have asked before reverting. I'm not sure why you find Bible quotes so terrifying on pages. And I don't know why you're so surprised that there was one on Joshua Graham's page, him being a Mormon and all. --Flower of Pock-Lips 08:52, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
- I might have asked, but then again you might have asked as well before your revert. Here is biblical quote for you "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets - Matthew 7:12". I don't have a issue with biblical quote, I have a issue with you and quotes. Firstly not properly attributing the quote and therefore making it non verifiable as per policy. Secondly you have a flare for inputting your own personal interpretation of the facts, example here, instead of quoting the exact line that pertains to the subject, you quote the full verse from the bible. So to sum it up, I have no faith in your edits (as you probably have noticed, not many around here do either) and I will continue to question them and revert them until you learn. 17:06, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
- I remind you once again that material that requires sourcing requires it in the article. It is not good enough just to post the source on someone's talk page. Nor is it good enough to mention the source once in a long article. A source with links must be included immediately with quotes and other material requiring sourcing.--Gothemasticator 05:08, March 27, 2011 (UTC)
- You were already specifically told not to do this. I'm blocking you again, this time for 1 month. Ausir(talk) 19:19, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
- I was told to source material in the article. What I did was include the information GhostAvatar added as a reference as a compromise - the material was now referenced in the article, just not right at the top of the page (although it could be reached from there). The quote at the top of the page is a flavour quote; I don't see how quoting a design document of all things constitutes that. My problem was with using a design document for a flavour quote. GhostAvatar's problem was with attributing the quotation properly. My edit addresses both of these, and I don't know why I should be blocked for a month for attempting to compromise.
- By the way, Ausir, I emailed you last week about Crazy sam10, and you have yet to respond? --Flower of Pock-Lips 19:29, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
- I don't see any compromise there. You changed a quote said by the character (even if only in the design doc) to one that wasn't said by him (even if it's the correct quote from the Bible). Your edit did not address any problem. GhostAvatar's (and mine) problem was first and foremost exactly with you replacing a line spoken by the character with the full Bible verse. And given that there's no other source of quotes for this character for now, this one is as good as any, until we replace it with one from Honest Hearts.
- And I did not get any e-mail from you. Ausir(talk) 19:37, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
- The compromise was in sourcing the quote at all (I am not actually against this, I just take issue with GhostAvatar's clumsy implementation. I would have used the references tag much earlier had I thought of it). The quote is attributed to the Bible if you look at the edit, and not to the character. I would be able to see why you have a problem were it attributed to the character, because that would be inserting false information, but as a flavour quote from a relevant source?
- I'm not sure why you are saying that GhostAvatar's problem was first and foremost to do with the full line being used instead of part of it when directly above he says his problem is "Firstly not properly attributing the quote and therefore making it non verifiable as per policy". But if you are saying the following would be okay in the article, then I suppose would accept that:
... and he burned incense in the valley of the son of Hinnom, and burned his sons as an offering...”— 2 Chronicles 28:3
- I don't know why you didn't get the email, but it doesn't matter as much now. By the way, before you blocked me I was playing around with a thing for File:Gametitle-FNV_HH.png, which I have uploaded at . I don't know if you want to use it in the interim before a more high-resolution version becomes available from the trailer, or what. --Flower of Pock-Lips 20:29, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
- As GhostAvatar said, "instead of quoting the exact line that pertains to the subject, you quote the full verse from the bible". This is what the whole thing is about primarily. The full Bible quote is irrelevant to the article about Graham, unless it's just a footnote to the design document quote. Anyway, I've unblocked you now, and let's continue the discussion on the quote to be used in the article on the article's talk page. Ausir(talk) 20:50, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
- I will do so tomorrow, as my IP is still autoblocked for a day. --Flower of Pock-Lips 21:03, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
- The problem with flavour quotes is that it is open to the contributors opinion and therefore not objective, plus it could be considered adding false information as you are putting words into the mouth of Joshua. Quotes should be word for word and attributed to in-universe sources first and foremost (developers as a secondary option). The above quote isn't a issue with me, but attributing it to the Bible instead of Joshua is since he is the one supposed to be saying it according to the design documents. And referencing should always be done as good practise for so many reasons. 21:19, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
- Well, let's put it this way: why can't the Bible be an in-universe source? That's what Graham was quoting - the words weren't his, they are the Bible's, and that presumably exists in the Fallout universe. The fact that he is saying them obviously makes them relevant to his character, sure, and that's why they should appear on his page - but at the end of the day, the words aren't his. That's why the Bible should probably be listed as the source for the quote, and the reference should include a quick note as to why that particular verse was used. --Flower of Pock-Lips 13:04, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
(Reset indent) Key word would be presumably, yet I have no found a single copy of the Bible in-game (even in or around any church). The content of the Bible could just as easily be passed down through generations by word of mouth (Kinda like Book of Eli). But that is beside the point, flavour quotes are not acceptable. The page quote should be verbatim either by or about the page content from a canon source (ie: in-game or a Dev), anything that the page content references in real world popular culture (including the Bible) belongs in the Behind the scenes section, or do I start adding all the other cultural references like Doctor Who as flavour quotes. 16:23, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- The difference is that Doctor Who doesn't exist in the Fallout universe, and is therefore not quotable. Even if the Bible didn't survive the War, it would still have existed at some point in Fallout's history. That said, I find it a bit of a stretch to imagine that the Bible did not survive the war, given that Graham quotes it. Would the Mormons not have kept a copy or two lying around in the giant underground Vault full of Mormons? We have plenty of evidence that Christianity survived the war:
- I think you are slightly misunderstanding the purpose of a flavour quote - it's not just some random text vaguely relevant to the page, it's a quick in-universe piece of text that can briefly give the reader a feel for the subject of the page. This is where your Doctor Who example fails on a second level, unless you can find something that might actually be so relevant to Doctor Who that a Doctor Who quote might be appropriate. Bible quotes, on the other hand, are less of a stretch because we're on the verge of a release of a DLC which is kind of all about a division of Christianity.--Flower of Pock-Lips 16:43, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I see you have taken the liberty of removing quotes from , , ,  and  whilst apparently refusing to defend your position that Bible quotes are out-of-universe and therefore "cultural references". I'm not keen to get into an edit war with you, but I'd advise continuing the discussion before making future such edits. --Flower of Pock-Lips 17:33, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- Errr you do realise the Doctor Who cultural reference is only one of many, and you have as much evidence that Doctor Who didn't exist in the Fallout universe as you do that the Bible does exist. Hell they could both be considered works of fiction (depending on your view), all you have is evidence that the faith still existed but not the works it is based off. 17:24, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- Whether the Bible is a work of fiction or not, there is strong evidence that it does exist in the Fallout universe. What I listed above is more than evidence that faith still exists, it is evidence that a very specific faith has managed to survive 200 years, in the Commonwealth, Capital Wasteland and Mojave Wasteland. That's 3 entirely separate locations in which the same religion survives unchanged, are you telling me that is likely to happen without any guiding document such as the Bible? Your argument also doesn't address the fact that the Bible existed pre-divergence, and is therefore part of the Fallout universe anyway.
- The main point is this: how do you suppose that both Marcella and Joshua Graham are able to quote the Bible if not a single copy still exists in the entire world? --Flower of Pock-Lips 17:33, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- Ever heard of oral tradition? or even morphic knowledge/resonance? I guess you have not. Your whole view is based on a series of assumptions, assumptions that are your own opinion and not shared by others (hence why your contributions get removed by others). It is based on if this exists, then this most also exist. But I digress as you are trying to pull the argument around to facts that have no relevance to the use of quotes, something that you fail to answer. Quotes should by the subject or about the subject, not cultural references, that is why we have the behind the scenes section. 18:08, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- This is getting silly now. As it happens, I have heard of oral tradition, and the notion that the people of the wasteland would pass down the entire Bible (verbatim, as well) down through the generations orally is frankly ridiculous, especially when you consider that there exists an entire vault of Mormons. I hadn't heard of morphic knowledge, but I Googled it and it appears to essentially be animal telepathy. So we needn't say any more about that. Thinking about it, I just that neither of us had realised that the simplest way of checking if the Bible is part of the Fallout universe: looking on the wiki. And it turns out that it is.
- To your second point, I would say that (a) the Bible quotes are not cultural references in that they are part of the Fallout universe, and that (b) they are very much relevant to the pages they appear on. They were chosen for those pages because those pages are relevant to the achievements listed in the reference for each quote, and the Bible verses referenced by those achievements happen to be relevant to the achievement. For example, Psalm 137:5, which you removed from the Honest Hearts page, is all about looking back at Jerusalem/Zion - which, given the relevant trophy that was added with the patch, seems to be very much relevant to the story of the DLC. Similarly, Psalm 137:8 is about a "daughter of Babylon" who is "to be destroyed", which is the fate of the White Legs. How can you say these are not about the subjects of the pages?
- Finally, as much as there is wrong with going around removing Bible quotes on pages when we are still discussing whether to include Bible quotes on pages, I feel I should point out you justified each edit partially with "this belongs in behind the scenes", yet you appear to have been too lazy to add them to behind the scenes yourself. --Flower of Pock-Lips 21:49, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- Another thing, you saying that my contributions are removed by others because they do not share the same assumptions that I do seems a little disingenuous when the majority of the removals that you refer to are performed by you. It's also fallacious to think that even if it were true that lots of people disagreed with me, I would be wrong. --Flower of Pock-Lips 21:54, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
Tjeez, can you stop with this biblical quote nonsense discussion. I'm getting fed up with it. It's just a game for crying out loud. Lighten up, will ya? Why don't you start doing some editing on less controversial pages instead making admins check just about every single edit you make. Jspoel 22:03, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not making anyone do anything. If GhostAvatar chooses to question my every attempt at contributing to the wiki then he should be prepared for the discussion that follows. --Flower of Pock-Lips 22:08, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- One such edit today alone and I aint going to go through the back history and waste my time to prove you wrong several times over on other editors disputing your edits and the subsequential blocks because of it. But this isnt about you so I will leave it there.
- What you have done is fail to convince me and others by the fact of the warnings given by them on your talk page, that such quotes are acceptable and frankly I have better and more productive things to do around here than babysit your edits. So I am going to say this simply, any more Bible references that are added to any page and attributed to the Bible, outside the Behind the scenes section will result in removal of the edit and a ban based on the content criteria and layout policy of The Vault. 22:36, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- Seriously? I attempt to have this discussion instead of just mindlessly reverting you and you respond with this? What you have done is have fail to convince me that such quotes are unacceptable, the difference between you and I being that I don't wield the banhammer. You seriously think that use of threats is an acceptable way for a sysop to behave? How would you have resolved this dispute had you not been able to threaten me with a block? --Flower of Pock-Lips 22:43, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
- Yes seriously, I have given you the benefit of the doubt and attempted to discuss this and not banned you as others have in the past. But time and again you keep failing to directly answer the content criteria and layout policy guideline issues posed, instead you try and skirt around it. And it isn't a threat, it is a warning that if you break the guidelines or policy of this Wiki again as I see them, then you will be treated like any other vandal. 00:25, April 27, 2011 (UTC)
- You haven't attempted to discuss anything. Whenever I prove you wrong you simply say that that is not the point of what we were discussing and attempt to shift the debate. When I address your new point you say you will ban me if I don't listen to you. You said that the Bible is not an in-universe source, I proved that it is. Then you tried to say that that is irrelevant and that the quotes I used don't pertain to the pages anyway, so I explained why they were. How is that skirting around anything?
- How do I "break" a guideline anyway? Aren't guidelines, by definition, not mandatory? There are no policies or guidelines on the use of flavour quotes at the top of pages that I am aware of, and you haven't referred to any specific policies or guidelines in this discussion. Therefore I find it a bit incredible for you to claim that the ban would be on the basis of "breaking policies or guidelines", rather than "disagreeing with GhostAvatar". --Flower of Pock-Lips 15:31, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
You have proved nothing, there is no direct incidents of the bible appearing in the games of Fallout, this is just your warped view trying to establish that there is based on speculation and real world referencing. You try to cleverly word it to prove a point that doesn't exist. Secondly you have not addressed flavour quotes being user opinion as mentioned at the very start, you have not addressed the layout guidelines issues either. Additionally, as I pointed you to the content criteria policy at the start, have not addressed that all content needs to relate to the games as delivered by the developers (again not your own interpretation of it instead), All content should relate to the Fallout series of games (not based on pre-divergence evidence), all content needs to be accurate (aka not putting words into the mouth of others by quoting the cultural reference instead of the in-game source). And finally, all content needs to be informative. Information which is only of interest to the writer or to other editors (as opposed to readers) should not be included in articles. You simply try to skirt the issues raised in an attempt to prove that something exists based on speculation, so until the policy of the Vault are changed, they are not to be included. 22:45, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
Trailer out--time to change the quote? Edit
(First time on talk, sorry if it's not proper to make a new heading for a continuation of a discussion.) Now that we have a trailer, would it be fitting to change the quote? --Kafeij 18:22, May 11, 2011 (UTC)
I have no idea why this page is locked when the Honest Hearts and Honest Hearts trailer pages are wide open, but it's really stupid. I think a better quote would be from the trailer when he says "I am the right hand of the Lord, and the instrument of his vengeance." Anything he says will do, it makes no sense to have a non-canon quote now. FinalWish 02:16, May 12, 2011 (UTC)
Agreed.--Rolsty 06:31, May 12, 2011 (UTC)
- I like that quote better myself... and as far the page is locked, I think I know very well why... =_= Great Mara 06:35, May 12, 2011 (UTC)
"Despite this Graham finds himself in conflict with Daniel and the Sorrows."
Do we know this for sure? And if so then why are both Graham and Daniel shown with the Sorrows in the trailer? I haven't had time to check all of the pre-release information so I apologise if this is how we know. -- 21:22, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
- It was in Bethesda's official description of the Honest Hearts add-on. (http://fallout.bethsoft.com/eng/games/fnv-dlc.php#hh) --Kafeij 23:28, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
Join pages? Edit
Should this page and the burned man page be linked? I looked them over and the burned man seems to go towards lore while the Joshua Graham page seems to be for the actual person. I'm kinda newish though so I am probably wrong. Xarxes 15:12, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
- Huh? There is no separate page for Burned Man, it redirects here. Ausir(talk) 15:17, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
I was looking at the url and saw they were different. Like I figured, I was wrong. Just making sure though!
Dead Money Edit
Can someone get rid of the thing that ses Grahams mentioned in DEAD MONEY? Cuz hes not in DEAD MONEY at all. I can't do it cuz for what ever reason the Wiki won't let me.
Book of Mormon Edit
I havent played it yet, but I thought the Book he was reading was a bible, not a book of mormon. The Book of Mormon wouldn't have a cross on it as we do not use the cross as one of our symbols, or is a mistake by the developers? 5t3v0 07:16, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
Oh, or is it just a part of the trailer? Because if so, then I guess it would be safe to say its a bible 5t3v0 07:17, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
- It is a Bible, which I thought was odd. While the Bible is indeed an important part of LDS doctrine, it is the Book of Mormon that makes us Mormons and not just Christians. Perhaps they thought it too controversial to place in game, and didn't want to deal with the repercussions. (i.e. "Mormon propaganda in new Fallout add-on...OH NOES!!!") --~Bana 22:03, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
- The book does appear in the game as the item named Scripture, the fact that they call it scripture and not the Bible says something. What the book is, is anyone's guess, but there is no definitive canon source on what it is as of yet. The best solution is to refer to it as it in-game name (ie: scripture), as this can cover the Bible as well as other books, and to save any confusion and/or arguments. 01:59, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, well then that settles it. It was probably just the cross that made it seem like it was a Bible, considering that Mormons have never used the cross as a symbol. --~Bana 22:03, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
The version of the Bible he quotes is the King James. Josh E. Sawyer has stated on his Formspring that Joshua Graham is not strictly labeled as any particular religion. "However you want to label them, they both make it very clear that they believe that Jesus Christ = salvation for the world's people. Really, I think that what they believe is more important than how their beliefs are labeled." Chris Church 05:25, July 6, 2011 (UTC)
This is a mature question. Were Caesar and Joshua Graham lovers? Edit
When I asked Joshua about Caesar with the dialogue option, "I'm guessing you don't like Caesar very much." He said, "Love the sinner, hate the sin. With Caesar, it's often very difficult to see through all that sin to the person inside." The way Caesar and Joshua seemed very touchy about the subject and it's rather odd how Caesar has no heirs. 18.104.22.168 02:07, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
Well homosexuality and Mormonism is not a new concept. Despite the way things seem now, same-sex attraction and even same-sex relationships occupy a very significant place in Mormon culture. And the fact that a Mormon missionary would help recreate a society notorious for it's "immoral" ways leaves one to think that he must have had some other motive beyond academic interest alone. ~Bana 22:04, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
I also thought their was some other motive for Joshua to help Caesar, and due to the sings that was the only logical motive I can think of. 22.214.171.124 02:07, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
- I believe what he meant was loveing your fellow man even if you abhorr the actions they may take.--Gdubs 08:51, May 23, 2011 (UTC)
I have absolutely no problem whether they were lovers or not. I just think it makes sense and makes the Honest Hearts story less hollow and better. 126.96.36.199 15:57, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
- Same here. God only knows it needs some gumption in that plot. I was so disappointed in the finished product, I would be happy with anything one could add to such a dry story.~Bana 07:51, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
- I liked the Biblilcal references in Honest Hearts, but the add-on seemed so disconnected and irrelevent to the story of the main game and Dead Money, and it seems it has little or nothing to do with Old World Blues and Lonesome Road. Unless there are some tribals, New Canaan survivors, former legionaires, or someone you can give or read the "Scripture" to trapped in the Big Empty or the Divide. I really don't see how the story in Honest Hearts is connected or relevent to the other add-ons. In my opinion Dead Money is better, because the characters and the story were interresting, it's more connected to the main game's story, and actually seems much more connected and relevent to Old World Blues and Lonesome Road. 188.8.131.52 23:56, May 26, 2011 (UTC)
Love the sinner, hate the sin does not mean you actually have physical relations with the person. It means love the person as a brother or sister and hate the bad things they do. --NoahZlatich (talk) 04:59, March 8, 2015 (UTC)
There seems to be a bit of a revert war going on with regards to which image we are using on this page with no proper discussion, so I thought I'd centralise things and make it so we can all have a sensible discussion here. The three candidates for image are as follows:
You'll notice I've put them in a gallery format so that we are better-positioned to consider their relative merits. Obviously I am biased - if I could see the advantages of either of the other two images over my preferred one then we wouldn't be having this discussion at all - so feel free to add to the "Why" and "Why not" reasons, and possibly alternative images to the gallery. For posterity I will include the reasons I originally put in the gallery as a permalink . --Lugiatm (talk · contribs) 20:08, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
- The one on the right that Itachou likes. Uniform with most other character articles on the wiki. I also think the left one is the worst of the lot. Great Mara 20:10, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Well, the one on the left could also be considered to have that "talking head" style, if you consider that the first time you meet Graham he is reloading his guns while you are in dialogue with him. Out of curiosity, is there any set policy on what kind of image we use in characters' infoboxes? Because sometimes we use concept art, sometimes we use full-body renders, sometimes we use what GhostAvatar describes and sometimes we just use a picture of the character doing something cool. --Lugiatm (talk · contribs) 20:28, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
- .png's losslessness is only really an advantage for small images like icons, or if you want to use a transparent image. The file size in .jpg images is far better in terms of compression and the amount of loss can be mitigated by a good image editor. Also, can we discuss how much of the character the image should show? Tazagiel originally removed the image on the left in favour of a lower quality image because it showed more of the character, but this contradicts GhostAvatar's statement that it should be head and shoulders only, as well as Tazagiel's later image preference. --Lugiatm (talk · contribs) 20:32, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
It terms of lossy versus loseless, .jpg files on low compression rate has no discernible difference in quality to the naked eye. However they do have a marked difference in size, resulting in more bandwidth being used by the viewer (ie: download-time). That is why it is the preferred image format, but not the de-facto image format in these cases. 20:37, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
- Isn't PNG generally favorable to JPG because it is of higher quality? Yuri(Leave a message!) 02:09, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
- Overall, all Wiki favors PNG and all sites in general. PNG is the best format that keeps the maximun usable information on the images, unlike any other format like gif, jpeg etc. but this is not an obligation.
- For the image of the character in general, the talking head style would be the best because it corresponds perfectly to the Fallout style (and that's usually the format used for other characters), the rest (4:3, 16:9 etc.) is for me completely optional. The use of mod should be banned, they are unofficial and they distorts the original style and quality desired by the developers. Itachou [~talk~] 14:09, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
- And why, exactly, is that listed as part of the "why nots"? If it is so negligible, it shouldn't be mentioned at all. After all, wikis have an infinite amount of space which can be used to add any sort of content, so .PNG's larger file size doesn't matter in the long run. Yuri(Leave a message!) 14:34, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
- The space on the wiki isn't the issue here, it's the loading times of pages. We need to be thinking about readers who don't have high-speed browsers, or use mobile internet. --Lugiatm (talk · contribs) 14:45, May 22, 2011 (UTC)
Soft-C Caesar Edit
I think it should be noted in the Notes section that Graham pronounces Caesar's name with a soft C, unlike almost every other Legion-affliated character in the game. It's not clear to me whether this is a production oversight or some kind of intentional slight to Caesar on Graham's part, but either way it seems notable since he was the guy's right-hand man AND a language specialist. BeatrixRussell 00:46, May 23, 2011 (UTC)
- Exactley he's a language specialist so he pronounces it the way americans pronounce it with a soft-c its mostly the assimilated tribals that say it with a hard-c. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gdubs (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~!
It's a Miracle! Edit
During the last quest where Joshua Graham is your compagnion, I noticed he never smims... Instead he just walked over the waters surface... I tried it out after i noticed this a few times and he kept doing this, or run around trough shallow parts/land to avoid the water.
It was a bit like teleporting though and I am pretty sure it is some sort of bug/glitch but can anyone else check this? He just seems to avoid swimming...--BlitzKrieg-BoB 21:32, May 23, 2011 (UTC)
No, I think he can just walk on water. I'm saying it was intentional. ~Nathan
Never seen other NPCs glitching and running across water? It's simply a bug not even unique to Joshua Graham. --184.108.40.206 02:54, October 9, 2011 (UTC)
100 Repair? Edit
The article says he can repair up to 100, is this based on anything the player does? I noticed on one play through he could not repair my stuff to full, then after a few quests and level ups I came back and he could repair them to I think 75. --Bottrot 03:32, June 4, 2011 (UTC)
I am the right hand of the Lord, and the instrument of his vengeance.
It depends what level you are. I got him to repair 100% at level 16.
Well I'm at level 50 and he can only repair to 73% this sucks.
Weird bug Edit
Nothing major. Just a rather creepy graphical glitch. At one point in the Crush the White Legs quest, Joshua's hands randomly enlarged into huge somewhat skeletal hands with fingers extending past the barrel of his .45.--Darth Oblivion 05:04, August 1, 2011 (UTC)
Making him Non-Hostile Edit
During the final part of the dlc, I accidentally shot a Dead Horse soldier thinking he was a White Leg. I saved right after I did it. I have an earlier save that is quite a bit before the final mission. I'd rather not restore to that save if there is any other way around it.
Joshua is now hostile to me when I spawn for the final part of the mission where you fight Salts-Upon-Wounds. Holstering my weapon doesn't stop him, I have to kill him or he'll kill me. This is not what I want to do.
Is there a console command that I can use to reset my faction with the New Canaanites or just Joshua Graham or whoever I'd need to reset it with to get him to stand down? I'm pretty frustrated that one stray bullet has him completely against me.
I don't think you can kill him while he's following you he just goes unconcious so i suggest reloading your save where he's hostile and shoot him until he's unconcious then finish the quest he will awaken after a bit but he might be non hostile when he gets up but since you saved just test your options--Chargersphinx 15:45, October 2, 2011 (UTC)
Caesar is dead... Edit
Thought this might be of interest to players who reach Joshua while Caesar is still alive, and may not have seen the dialogue. Too big for the Notes section, which is already massive.
The Courier's speech options, and Joshua's replies:
- Courier: "Caesar is dead. I saw to it personally. I thought you should know."
- Graham: "I have to admit, it's hard to believe. That even after all he did to me, all he tried to do to find and erase me from this world, he went first. No doubt this will be good for the Mojave. I can only hope Arizona and the tribes don't suffer as the Legion falls apart around them."
- Option 1:
- Courier: "They won't. I'll make sure the Legion has very little to go home with."
- Graham: "Hmm, good. You're doing God's work, whether you believe it or not."
- Option 2:
- Courier: "We'll see."
- Graham: "The Lord shall reveal all things in good time."
- Option 3:
- Courier: "You don't think Lanius can lead the Legion?"
- Graham: "I think only Caesar can lead the Legion. I've never met anyone who could take his place. I couldn't. I never had a mind for logistics. I don't know Lanius, but from what I've heard, he has no interest in leading anyone unless it's in battle. No. The Legion dies with Caesar. What follows now are just the last steps of a man who does not yet realize that he's walking dead."
--FourWayDiablo 13:42, August 22, 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, characters with good intelligence as Marcus and Joshua can easily see that the Legion will collapse with the death of Caesar (Lanius is just a bloodthirsty beast, he will be unable to take the reins). Anyway I don't agree with Joshua, I think he could have held the reins of the Legion and half of the Caesar's Legion ideas come from him, since he is the co-founder. Itachou [~talk~] 14:07, August 22, 2011 (UTC)
I do agree with you there, but I doubt that he would want to. He has changed his ways to the greater good and already has a new tribe. Though if he was the leader, I would actually join Caesar's Legion (or Joshua's Legion)--For NCR 16:46, March 5, 2012 (UTC)
you can pickpocket joshua Edit
you can actually pickpocket joshua graham as long as he's asleep and you have the mister sandman perk(works with daniel too). "a light in shining darkness" will not show even if you take his bullets and put a replacement weapon(i put a mantis glove).
True! Also, you DO NOT need the Mister Sandman perk, I just tried it without the perk and was still able to pickpocket him! Somebody should change the article to let everyone know it is still possible to pickpocket, yet you can't get his unique .45 auto pistol.Felix Brehh 05:42, September 4, 2011 (UTC)
While the pickpocketing may be news, it says on the host page that he uses a non-playable version of A Light Shining in Darkness. - David Hellsly
- Beyond that (since you get the pistol regardless by either completing the DLC or killing Graham), all the caps you spend on repairs can be pickpocketed from him. You have to immediately fast travel before he can reclaim them or he turns hostile (as you will probably be caught if you spent any significant amount on repairs) or else you fail all unfinished quests. So, essentially, he performs 100% repairs for nothing. --DeadlyPrey(talk) 02:57, October 10, 2011 (UTC)
I noticed something strange when wearing Joshua Graham's armour. When speaking to certain NPCs such as Ranger Milo near Nelson and Emily Ortal outside the Lucky 38, I had access to unique dialogue options to do with Joshua Graham. Stuff like "The names Joshua Graham" and a barter speech check of "Dr. Joshua Graham diagnoses a lack of discussion of caps here" or something. I don't know if this is to do with the fact I'm wearing his armour or if its to do that my character is called "Joshua Graham". Has anybody else noticed this?
- Nah dude, that's normal, some of the NPCs ask for your name, it was just coincidence that you named your character that. --Felix Brehh 00:48, September 30, 2011 (UTC)
pistol holstering Edit
xbox360 Don't think I've ever seen Graham holster his pistol with the barrel pointing down. Is this something that should be listed under bugs or does it have to do with his unique melee attack? --DeadlyPrey(talk) 03:03, October 10, 2011 (UTC)
- Guess I answered my own question. I've always pickpocketed his ammo and never noticed the position of his gun otherwise. --DeadlyPrey(talk) 04:05, October 10, 2011 (UTC)
If he went with Edward Sallow to Arizona in 2246 he has to at least be in his early sixties... Should that be noted?
--BLACKHAWK1989 13:10, November 18, 2011 (UTC)
I'd say 50s. If 2281 is 35 years after 2246, so if we assume Joshua was in his twenties at that point then he must be at least mid-late 50s by the time he's leading the Dead Horses. --220.127.116.11 16:59, November 24, 2011 (UTC)
Joshua Graham Glitch? Edit
I can't seem to talk to Joshua Graham at all. This occurred on the PS3, I went to there camp by myself. Oh there's also this green haze, or lighting that occurred several times throughout the day.
Can anyone look into this?
Disappears Post-Honest Hearts? Edit
i went back to Zion Canyon after the events of Honest Hearts,i can't find Joshua Graham anywhere,does he dissappear from the game or what?
He does disappear along with Daniel and several other characters. Flamdring 04:40, April 23, 2012 (UTC)
base id for pre-burned man Joshua Graham Edit
According to the G.E.C.K., te base id of non-burn Joshua Graham is xx010947. Should it be added to the article?
- Yes that can be added. Just did that. Jspoel 20:28, February 25, 2012 (UTC)
better quote? Edit
What is his ending for The Flight From Zion ending? It doesn't say on his page.
His Ending for Flight from ZIon Edit
WHat is his ending for the Flight from Zion ending? It doesn't say on his page.
So does that mean his ending is up to the player's imagination?
Missing sound file Edit
When I talk to Joshua for the first time, if I get him to quote the bible verse, there's no sound file with it. Normally, this would just be a basic glitch, but the dialogue option to get him to quote it reads "PRNISWho", with no other options available at that moment. Can anyone even so much as confirm this odd bit? Schiffy (T|C) 17:03, August 1, 2013 (UTC)
Possible to kill him AND complete Dead Horses ending? Edit
I'm wondering if it's possible to kill Joshua at about the same time you kill Salt-Upon-Wounds to get both the ending where Joshua is dead, AND the Dead Horses drive the White Legs from the park. 18.104.22.168 15:56, July 9, 2015 (UTC)
Not sure, cuz usually when you kill Joshua, it fails about every quest. Save and then try it and see what happens and go back to your save if it doesnt work. NoahZlatich (talk) 21:58, July 9, 2015 (UTC)