Talk:Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Warning of Guinness Book of World Records Inaccuracy

The Guinness World Records 2009 Gamer’s Edition names San Andreas as the "largest Grand Theft Auto environment" but erroneously describes the area as 17 square miles. The 13.9 square miles currently given in the article is CORRECT with a good citation. The risk is a future editor who might consider Guinness authoritative. In fact the source of Guinness' bad information is a previous version of this article! I know because I'm responsible for both the incorrect and subsequent correct edits (both done before I registered). The 17 number was created by me based on a failed attempt to interpret the scale of the game map. Unfortunately the incorrect information had quite a long time to propagate before I corrected it. We see the danger of leaving bad information on Wikipedia: a traditional publication may use Wikipedia as a source and then itself be cited as a source. Magic Al Too

Glitches

GTA SA has many glitches. Some include "Blue Hell" or "Underworld" Glitches where you are floating around out of the game area. (someone please continue this, as i have to leave now). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Number13lucky (talk • contribs) 22:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Sweeps delist

As part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps, this article was found to not meet GA criteria. As the article still does not meet WP:GA?, the article has been boldly delisted. You can renominate at WP:GAN once you feel it meets criteria. Thank you, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 23:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Can I ask how this article no longer meets the criteria? --.:Alex:. 13:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Lack of sources. The impression i've got from reading various threads on GA/FA related talk pages in the past, is that GA standards have risen a bit; so it probably isn't the article that's changed, it's people's interpretation of GA criteria. I think it's fair to say, though, the article could use more citations. Dbam ^Talk/_{Contributions} 20:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Media Appearances

Maybe there should be a section about San Andreas being in other forms of Media? I can think of two right off the top of my head. Dave Chappelle mentioned CJ from San Andreas in a Tupac sketch, and in the movie "The Breakup" one of the main characters, Gary, is seen playing San Andreas for a few moments. Pvegeta 07:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Would they be note-worthy? Perhaps the first one but the second one sounds like a stretch. John.n-irl (talk) 13:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

"References in popular culture" would be the appropriate heading. Other articles have such blurbs, so I don't see why these can't be included. ArcAngel (talk) 14:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Being glimpsed on the corner of a tv-show is not a "reference in popular culture". John.n-irl (talk) 15:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

So, in your view, visual references aren't notable? ArcAngel (talk) 16:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

No, a visual reference is one thing, however being used as a prop in a show/movie is not really note worthy in most circumstances. Otherwise, Wikipedia would be nothing but "References in popular culture". However it would be worth noting if a game appeared prior to its release, as was the case with Heavenly Sword and the TV show Heros. John.n-irl (talk) 17:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

CSI mentioned it in an episode and someone quoted "What happened to Pong"? Would that count?

Sales

That 20+ million sales includes all versions on the various consoles, it's not all on the PS2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pika62221 (talk • contribs) 00:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Trivia

I'm thinking on making a trivia section. I have got some trivia.

1. The game is set in 1992,and during the beginning cutscene of 'Just Business' (a mission from Big Smoke) a bin with a recycling symbol is seen, and recyling isn't invented until around 2001.

I'm Intellegent! (talk) 10:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sections for trivia should be avoided. Also, it's wrong. Recycling was "invented" a long time before 2001. Bill ^{(talk|contribs)} 10:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

According to this that estimate is off by 2,400 years. Beeblbrox (talk) 17:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey i think he means recycling "bins" weren't invented, yes recycling was, but not bins!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Number13lucky (talk • contribs) 22:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

So when I was a kid in '91 and separating paper and plastic, etc into different recycling bins after watching Captain Planet with my classmates, I was really in some kind of timewarp and it was really 2001?? Wow! I knew it! (192.43.227.18 (talk) 00:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC))

The City/State didn't institute public recycling pick-up until '01 —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisH171 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure? Because I could have sworn that San Andreas was fictional, even if it is based on real locations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.231.248.31 (talk) 17:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

No, San Andreas is based on the movie Scarface, and a lot of quotes and cutscenes are based on that movie. But I'm not completely sure about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.248.141.74 (talk) 20:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Live-action film

What do you guys and girls think about a Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas live-action film? I think it will make millions at the box office. The King Gemini (talk) 18:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Not the place for such discussion, sorry. —T-borg (T | C) 19:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

What the hell you mean not the place for such discussion? The King Gemini (talk) 04:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

What you were suggesting fell under WP:FORUM, hence T-borg's response to your question. Please limit discussions to improving the article. Thank you. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:08, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

6th game in the series?

I believe its the 6th gta game overall going from gta, gta london 1969, gta2, gta3, gta vice city and then this, anyone would like to clarify this? i remember playing both the original gta and gta london and they were different games but I'm not too sure about it since it's been a while.Alexandurs (talk) 05:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know London 1969 is a mission pack for the original GTA, as stated in this article. —T-borg (T | C) 09:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

time period

The game is mentioned as taking place in late 1992. Although the opening cut scene does start in "Liberty City, 1992" it would be impossible for the entire games events to take place in just '92. Radio L.S. plays several songs from The Chronic, which was released December 15, 1992, and none of the songs were released as singles until early '93. I doubt the game is meant to be played in less than 16 GTA 24-minute days. Ok, so maybe I'm being a little picky, but I propose changing "Set in late 1992" to "Begining in late 1992" or something to that affect. Because even if we disregard the release date of Chronic and assume that the game began as early as January 1, 1992, the game doesn't stop you from playing once you reach 366 days, which can extend the storyline indefinitely, even into the future if the player were to spend that much time playing (I'm sure there are plenty of people who, if they did the math, would find that Niko Bellic is already in 2009 on their 360). -Wakamusha (talk) 18:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

ehm, or Ps3... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Number13lucky (talk • contribs) 22:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Good point, if you see the above about recycling there are a few problems with the time period as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisH171 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Don't neglect the fact that 'late 1992' could represent any time from between August - December (as August is considered to be the lae half of the yar, in the opinions of some). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.37.6 (talk) 06:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

The article currently says the game takes place in March 1992, yet I cannot find any dialogue that suggests that month. (A later date makes more sense, as many songs in the game were not released until much later in the year.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.251.159 (talk) 07:57, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Epsilon

No mention of Kifflom??? StopVandalsNow 19:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

pirate versions?

What about a mention of the different pirate versions floating about out there... ? StopVandalsNow 15:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Tell me, how are pirated versions notable? Can you add reliable sources along with them to the article? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 17:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Google is your friend StopVandalsNow 22:41, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

That's not good enough. You can't tell if the results are reliable enough for Wikipedia or not. By reliable source I mean those that pass WP:Reliability. You still haven't answered either of my questions. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 22:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, can't you read? StopVandalsNow 22:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

You still haven't answered my questions. "Google is your friend" is not a valid answer as I was asking how it's notable and if you have a reliable source. If you won't tell me how they're notable, I really don't think it belongs to the article. And argument such as "can't you read" will get you nowhere. Stuff has to be reliable in order to be on Wikipedia, I will try to find someone to explain this better. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 23:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Just try googling "gta sa piracy" already. its notable. StopVandalsNow 11:25, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

That there are people who have pirated GTA:SA is hardly unusual, and that it was pirated a week before it was released is also not unusual. Maybe a single sentence in the publishing notes, but that should be all. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:49, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, WP:GHITS explains it quite clearly. I found some sources from 2004, reliable ones too, with Google. But the question one must ask themselves is whether the notability can be established just because there are reliable sources reporting it. I think, as mattbuck says it, that it can be included in a single sentence like it is done with various music albums as well. I think it can be placed within the History-section. So#Why 16:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree StopVandalsNow 17:38, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Myths

The last part of the "myths" section is garbled and I'm not sure what it's trying to say:

"The UFOs were later proven wrong in GTA San Andreas. It was the artificial UFO above the old bar in the desert, it was then known that it had been created by Rockstar Games."

Huh? 207.112.82.107 (talk) 04:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't get it.ChrisH171 (talk) 20:44, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

No myths section

Why was it removed.Can Some one bring it back.I loved to read all about the myths but now i can't —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.149.7.174 (talk) 10:11, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but what are you talking about? The section still exists, X201 just removed everything that is not a myth but commentary. So#Why ^{review me!} 10:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Cheats

Could we start putting good cheats on this site. ChrisH171 (talk) 20:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

No. See item 1 at WP:NOTGUIDE - X201 (talk) 20:47, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Merging Setting Article with Main Article

I disagree with the merging of the San Andreas(Grand Theft Auto) article with the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas article under the "setting" section. The setting section could be kept and used for a brief description but the location article is good for those wanting a more detailed description. (Sk5893 (talk) 02:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC))

I also disagree with the merging of San Andreas(Grand Theft Auto) article with the Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas article under the "setting" section. GTA3 and GTA:VC gave their locations listed in another separate article for their locations. While San Andreas; a much larger location is briefly merged in the video-game article. How am I supposed to find all names of the locations for San Andreas this way if the whole article is gone now?

--66.214.140.237 (talk) 03:11, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with it. This merging shouldn't have been done at all. The King Gemini (talk) 02:46, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

The article couldn't meet the sourcing requirements. If you can provide some 3rd party sources then the article could be recreated with more of an emphasis on real world aspects of San Andreas as opposed to mostly just describing the features. Bill ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Then why do the locations of Vice City and Liberty City get their own articles? They had the same sources as the San Andreas setting article. 66.214.140.237 (talk) 11:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

They just haven't been cleaned up yet. I have a very rough work in progress of Liberty City in my sandbox where I'm attempting to move the focus away from mainly describing the city and towards a more out of universe perspective. I haven't attempted much with Vice City yet but I don't think there's the sources out there to support an article. Bill ^{(talk|contribs)} 14:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Game geographic parallels

The section dealing with what the faux neighborhoods in GTA:SA represent I don't think is accurate. Jefferson is probably supposed to represent Jefferson Park or the Crenshaw District of South LA, and I think East Los Santos, while it SOUNDS like East LA, the presence of primarily African-American gang members (the Ballas), the presence of the Ganton Towers (which are close replicas of the Watts towers) and the train tracks running through the neighborhood make it seem to be more equivalent to Watts. East Beach would, I assume, be equivalent to Long Beach. Anyone want to back me up on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.237.88.252 (talk) 06:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Err, this game is NOT the best selling gamne of all time in the US. That would be Super Mario Bros. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.19.82 (talk) 10:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I added Union Station (Unity Station in SA) to the game parallels section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.35.193 (talk) 06:24, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

System Requirements

The System Requirements of Grand Theft Auto San Andreas are given in the article. But I dont think these requirements are correct. I have a PC that has higher specifications than the requirements. But still the game does not runs smoothly on my computer with a default resolution of "800x600x32" The requirements given are :-

1 GHz Intel Pentium III or AMD Athlon CPU 256 MB RAM 8x DVD drive 3.6 GB hard disk space 64 MB DirectX 9.0-compatible graphics card DirectX 9.0-compatible sound card Windows 2000/XP.

But I have a PC whose specifications are :-

Intel Pentium IV having two processors each of 2.80 GHz 768 MB RAM 16x DVD Drive 4.7 GB hard disk space 128 MB Graphics card ( Intel(R) 82915G/GV/910GL Express Chipset ) Windows XP

These specifications are much higher than the requirements But still the game runs slowly on my PC. So, I think these requirements are not correct —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bilal2009 (talk • contribs) 09:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

It wouldn't be a good idea to change the text of the article based on an editor's anecdotal experience. From my own anecdotal experience, I had no trouble running the game on a system with much less impressive specs than yours. Croctotheface (talk) 20:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

But I still have the game on my PC with these specifications and it runs slowly. Wikipedia should provide the original requirements of the game

Hey Bilal, just because SA runs slowly on your PC doesn't mean WP will do what you want. It doesn't work that way. Why not ask Rockstar Games yourself? The requirements will not be changed just because your specs are higher. --Eaglestorm (talk) 07:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, the system specs have less to do with it than how you are running the game. Are you running it alone? Are you also running ten instant-messaging programs in the background, as well as Itunes, uTorrent, mIRC, IIS, etc etc? To be honest, if your machine outclasses the requirements and the game runs badly on minimum settings, it's your computer that is screwy, not the game.

--12.21.161.34 (talk) 18:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Hidden Bad Words in The Source Code

Found out GTA San Andreas has hidden some bad words in the source code. Notable file surfinfo.dat has TARMAC_FUCKED, TARMAC_REALLYFUCKED, PAVEMENT_FUCKED, and FUCKED_CONCRETE in its source code.

RfD Discussion re: Redirects to this page

A number of redirects to this page are being discussed for deletion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion#Back_Alley_Brawl. Please participate! Thanks. -- smurdah^{[citation needed]} 18:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

massive size

is this the biggest one concerning square ft?

Multiplayer

Why isnt this article mentioning the sa:mp (San Andreas multiplayer)? And why is it that everytime I search for sa:mp in the english wikipedia, I'm sendt to a weird Indian wikipedia site? 83.108.208.23 (talk) 02:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I do not know for sure why there is no SanAndreas-MultiPlayer related section. The modification is very popular and the website says they're currently developing a new version. What I do know is that there was a page and it was removed probably due to mis-belief that the modification was discontinued. Also, someone else said it was removed is because it is not "an official modification of the game"... official according to who? I have looked on Wikipedia for a page on the modification once and found a small page that was later also removed. If there is not a section someone should make one and the page should not be deleted.75.161.181.172 (talk) 21:41, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Unlocking Missions

I passed Los Sepulcros mission, and I cannot unlock Reuniting The Families. I know that I need to pass Gray Imports, House Party, and Robbing Uncle Sam (I have already passed Just Business and High Stakes, Low Rider missions, and I think I can easily pass House Party and Gray Imports. Tell me, I have to complete Ryder's mission Robbing Uncle Sam to unlock Reuniting The Families? It is so hard, and I WANT TO UNLOCK REUNITING THE FAMILIES to reach San Fierro. Can anyone help me?--BubbleBabis (talk) 16:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Mr BubbleBabis, I think you went to the wrong site. The talk page is only for discussions on improving the article, not cheats, walkthroughs, and whathaveyou. Thank you. --Eaglestorm (talk) 17:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I passed it with no help. I'm ready to play Reuniting The Families tomorrow. Adios amigos!!!--BubbleBabis (talk) 17:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Citation #24

About the voice actors... I read the Gamers Edition 2009 book before... I'm sure that was GTA IV, not San Andreas.

Judging by the fact there's only around <300 character skins, it's not likely there are 700 actors, so it must be incorrect. Someone please check this. --81.153.45.180 (talk) 20:03, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Protection

May you please indefinitely semi-protect the article of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas due to heavy vandalism and need to revert.

Posted by PK2, 3:49 PM.

Image

Should we include an image in the article.

Posted by PK2. (6:59 AM)

Protection

May you please indefinitely semi-protect the article of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas due to heavy vandalism and need to revert. PK2 (talk) 06:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC) --60.52.82.192 (talk) 09:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)--60.52.82.192 (talk) 09:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<math>Insert non-formatted text here</math>[[Media:Example.ogg]]

Add Reception Chart?

Do you think it's okay if I add the Reception chart and the game review scores along with it? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 02:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Page protection

Hey folks,

Can we semi-protect this article? -- ПКII (PK2) (talk) 10:01, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Why? Compared to other articles on Wikipedia, this receives very low vandalism. -- GSK (talk ● evidence) 15:51, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Because there are a lot of edits that have been undid and reverted? -- Phillip Kragulj (talk) 20:11, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

There has not been near enough recent activity to justify any protection at this time. For semi to take place, numerous edits over a several HOUR period have to take place. As it is - there have been numerous edits - but over MONTHS. ArcAngel (talk) 20:53, 25 September 2009 (UTC)+-

Kifflom and Episolon

The redirect Kifflom, which targets this article, has been nominated for deletion at RfD. Those familiar with the subject, particularly those who might know why it is no longer discussed in this article, are invited to comment at the discussion. -- ToE^T 14:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Protection

{{editsemiprotected}}

For recent vandalism edit Grand Theft Auto: SanAndreas witch are against rule of wikipedia policy Wikipedia:Vandalism same vandalism seen on page Grand Theft Auto: Vice City ^{Snake bgd} 11:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Not done: Please use this page to request protection. Celestra (talk) 14:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

San Andreas (Grand theft Auto) article

Can one of the top powers redirect that to San Andreas (Grand Theft Auto). Its discussion page just diverts to this one so using the {{subst:move|NewName}} tag won't work. VEO^onefive 23:26, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from EZEKIELCARVALHO, 30 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} I would like to request you to kindly grant me permission with respect to editing the gta san andreas article.I wish to only delete the hot coffee controversy part along with the picture as the matter contains pornography and or erotic materials which is inclusive of the picture.I suggest to you that such matter is not necessary.Please note that I do not want to vandalize your article,I am only just saying that such matter should not be put in Wikipedia.

I hope you will agree to my letter and let me delete the matter which I have specified.

Thanking you in the mean while I remain. EZEKIELCARVALHO (talk) 16:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

 Declined. Sorry but the content is relevant, notable and received a huge amount of coverage. As such, it's vital to any article about the subject and will not be removed. Please read Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not censored as to why we do not remove material that is pornographic or erotic in nature when it's relevant to the article. If you personally are offended by seeing such images, please read Help:Options to not see an image. Regards SoWhy 17:05, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I think you ought to put your reservations about pornographic material to yourself and seriously take the vandalism warning you've recently received. If you ever do this again, it could have you blocked. --Eaglestorm (talk) 23:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Verdant Meadows

Is there a source verifying that Verdant Meadows airfield is based on Davis-Monthan AFB? I've been there and nothing about Verdant Meadows even remotely resembles any part of DM. Also, DM is in Arizona while everything in the game is based on California and Nevada. This connection seems like speculation by someone who is trying to assign a real-world parallel to every location in the game, whether one is intended or not. - 67.170.208.165 (talk) 10:10, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

If there's no source, or you can't find one, tag it by putting {{fact}} next to the offending text. If its the whole section that is at fault, put {{Unreferenced section}} at the top of the section containing the text. If the problem hasn't been addressed inside a month or two then you are free to remove it. If you think that it is a deliberate attempt to mislead, you can remove it straight away. You are best placed to sort this out as you have ties to the locations mentioned. Will help where I can. - X201 (talk) 10:27, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

It could also be removed if no source can be found since then it would be considered original research.   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 11:47, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

هخ

ىلاى — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.230.51.174 (talk) 20:36, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Suggest image removal

I suggest the removal of the "Welcome to Las Venturas" image. It serves little purpose in explaining the game.--128.119.169.34 (talk) 01:57, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

File:San Andreas Detailed Map.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:San Andreas Detailed Map.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:47, 2 November 2011 (UTC)