Whenever I would try posting a discussion, when I would put the tags that fit the discussion in, and try to click post, it wouldn't let me because of the suggested tags in the way. It wouldn't let me do cancel either for the same reason.
It could be that the page hasn’t loaded properly or that there’s something wrong with your account. You could try reloading the page and posting again, and if that doesn’t work, maybe try logging out of your account and then logging in again. I’m not entirely sure as this hasn’t happened to me before.
Hmm, it looks like it’s some kind of visual glitch on the website. I’ve never encountered it before so I can’t say for certain what will work, but I would suggest clicking around a bit and seeing what happens, closing and re-opening the programme, and maybe even restarting your device. You could also go to Community Central and search up glitches in the discussions to see if there’s any advice, or perhaps contact an admin on their message wall to see if they know what’s up.
Yes, I am. As this message on your wall mentioned, pages for individual, non-legendary online bounty targets - whether they’re singular, duo or a gang - will no longer have their own page. Future standalone pages such as the one in question will also be deleted. As previous discussions have mentioned, they are too minor to have a page for themselves and will instead be put on the Bounty targets in Online page, but obviously without a link as there shouldn’t be a page for each target to link to.
I need to get AjaxBatchDelete in AutoWikiBrowser to be working in order to delete the remaining 300+ pages or so, which I haven’t been able to do yet, although I should be able to do it soon. Apologies for this.
I'm a bureaucrat of the French version.
I have a YouTube channel for the trailer. If you would use for your page: 
I am not paying for the videos.
Bon Wiki Thegamer1604 (Discussion) 21:34, January 2, 2020 (UTC)
There’s very little that can be said about a bounty wagon. In terms of content, you could have:
The wagon's function (which is fairly simple anyway)
And not much else. An article with such a small potential for information should not be on the wiki. In fact, the bounty wagon is already mentioned on the Wagons page, under the section for Red Dead Online. You may expand this if you wish, and you could add your photo to the gallery, but a page for itself is not only a duplicate page of sorts, but also too lacklustre.
Hey there Wagwan. In Red Dead Redemption 1, John mentions that Bill left him to die. There are two occasions of this, once during the mission "Spare the Rod, Spoil the Bandit" (You need to fail the mission to get this specific line of dialogue):
John: Barring in mind, he left me (Bill) to die twice now.
The second is during "An Appointed Time":
John: You shouldn't have left me to die, Bill.
Bill: Well, no one wanted you around, John.
It's very clear that John is referring to Bill leaving him to die at the robbery. Red Dead Redemption 2 contradicts this by showing that Bill did not, in fact, leave John to die. The ones who left John to die were Dutch, Javier, Micah, and Joe.
I added trivia to the pages for "An Appointed Time" and "Our Best Selves" mentioning this fact. However, on the former page, I somewhat got into a minor edit war (I apologize for that) with another user who claims that due to the fact that Bill was on Dutch's side, Bill inherently left John to die, something I disagreed with. He also claims that the Pinkerton attack on Beaver Hollow is what John was referring to, which I think is unlikely, as no one was left to die there, it was an "everyman for himself" type situation.
If you think of it from John's perspective, Bill did leave him to die. When John is shot off the train, all he would see of Bill is him continuing to ride. We don’t know whether Dutch got to him, but regardless, John wouldn’t consider Bill any differently, as Bill never reached him either.
It’s also true that, when Dutch went back for John, he went with Micah and Javier. Bill may have been like Arthur - too engrossed in what he’s currently doing to suddenly leave - but this doesn’t make any difference to John as he isn’t aware of the circumstances. Also remember that Bill did not volunteer to look for John, so technically he did leave John there.
I do agree that the standoff at Beaver Hollow is not the moment which is being referred to, but something else interesting happens here. In the caves, John says to Arthur: "Those bastards left me for dead", and Arthur responds with, "I guess that’s what they do now". In both instances, use of "they" and "those" indicate that they are referring to the gang collectively - including Bill. Arthur does not say that Bill didn’t leave him to die, and that’s arguably because it wouldn’t be true. Even though Arthur doesn’t go back because Dutch says he’ll go and rescue John, Bill is not told this and barely even reacts.
Regardless of whether it’s fair on him, Bill did leave John to die. Perhaps more importantly, from John's point of view, Bill is no different from the other gang members leaving him to die. I therefore don’t see any issue with continuity, as what John remembers in RDR is ultimately right: he got shot and was simply left there.
The problem is that John is specifically mentioning Bill leaving him to die. In "An Appointed Time", Bill doesn't deny leaving John to die. Someone like Bill would definitely deny that, especially if he didn't actually leave John behind.
If Bill left John behind due to the fact he did not vounteer to look for John, then going by that logic, Arthur, Sadie, and Cleet also left John behind as well. In the epilogue, John doesn't mention Cleet leaving him to die, even though going by the above logic, he should. By contrast, he's angry at Joe, even if you try to defuse, likely because he was there when they actually left him to die. This suggests that he's aware of who left him to die and who didn't.
John is a fair man, he's not going to accuse Bill of something he didn't do. It's clearly, in my opinion, a continuity error.
We don’t know whether John saw the posse of Dutch, Micah, Joe and Javier, which is the problem. If he did, then he wouldn’t consider Bill in the same group as those who went for him and never came back. If not, then he wouldn’t know any different and would think that Bill left him. Technically, Arthur, Sadie and Cleet left him to die too, but given how John didn’t see much of the latter two and presumably realised that Arthur either wouldn’t leave him there of his volition or couldn’t physically get to him, it’s likely that he excused them. What’s Bill's excuse? Assuming that John didn’t see the posse (which we don’t know), he never saw him and so he would logically assume that Bill left him to die. If he did see the posse, then admittedly there is an issue here.
Regarding Cleet and Joe in the epilogue, John's refrainment from saying that Cleet left him to die does not confirm that he thinks Cleet is innocent in this. As I mentioned in the last paragraph, it’s perfectly possible that John excused him as he barely saw Cleet during the train robbery. However, there’s also no point at which John could mention Cleet betraying him during the epilogue, so it doesn’t confirm that anything. Again, the issue is what John saw, which we don’t know. With Joe, John is much more likely to be angry with him due to the context of the situation: Joe confronting John and threatening to kill him. John doesn’t mention anything about Joe leaving to die or not either, as far as I know, so we don’t know if he considers the two any differently on the issue of leaving him to die.
As for what Bill says in "An Appointed Time", that must be considered with the context. First and foremost, Bill tries to taunt Bill, so he’d probably rather John think, in this instance, that he did leave him to die. If Bill is trying to wind John up, why would he deny the accusations? It’s also a coach chase, so Bill would not be able to explain all the details due to the physical and practical impossibility of doing so.
Tl; dr, the bottom line is this: whether there is a continuity error depends on whether John saw the posse. If he did, there is, because he’d know that Bill wasn’t part of the group who left him. If he didn’t, which can be supported with John assuming that Bill did leave him (although it can’t actually be confirmed), then there’s no issue here as John would’ve naturally assumed that Bill was no different from anyone else. We can only speculate, and as such, it should be kept out of the trivia on articles.
During the robbery, John can be seen yelling at Bill to jump on the train. Bill jumps on the train, couple seconds later, John gets shot and falls off. John has enough time to process the fact that Bill jumped on the train, making it impossible for him to think that Bill left him behind. John might be angry at Bill in 1911, but he isn’t going to accuse Bill of something he didn’t do.
I personally don’t think it’s impossible for John to think that Bill left him behind. A lot happens when Bill jumps on the train, and given that John only sees it for a split second while having to process lots of other things, it may not be a detail that he would remember. John gets shot off a few seconds later and may have become unconscious, so it’s therefore possible that he may not have remembered the events very clearly, as a result of this or not.
The fact that John mentions Bill leaving him to die in “Spare the Rod, Spoil the Bandit” in a context where he isn’t angrily insulting Bill to his face, it suggests that he genuinely thinks that Bill left him to die. If John never saw the posse, it’s perfectly possible for him to assume, rightly or wrongly, that Bill left him behind. I’m not convinced that this is 100% a continuity error.
In my opinion, the fact is, that John is at least partially aware of who left him behind. If we go by the above logic, that John assumes everyone on Dutch's side are the ones who left him to die, then he should've thrown an insult at Cleet for "leaving him to die". There was plenty of time to do that, like when John was chasing him.
John is clearly much more willing to kill Joe than Cleet. If you antagonize Joe, John will say "I was kinda hoping I could kill you". Even if you defuse, John will still have an angrier tone to his voice. Yet with Cleet, John is either apathetic or hesistant to kill him. That's definitely not due to the context of those situations, why would he be more angry at Joe than Cleet? Likely because Joe actually left him for dead. This suggests to me that he is aware of who left him to die.
If John was completely unconscious during the whole ordeal, than there's no reason for John to go back to camp and yell at Dutch for leaving him to die, since Dutch would have a very good reason to assume that John is dead. The fact that Dutch doesn't deny this ("I had no choice, John I didn't") suggests that John was at least partially conscious when the gang left him to die and thus would see who left him to die. I think John would definitely remember yelling at Bill to get on the train and then see him phyiscally jump on the train, thus making it impossible for John to think that Bill left him to die.