BattleTechWiki talk:Project Planets/Archive1

Member Userbar[edit]

  • Okay, Leadman, I've uploaded Skuggi's member userbar suggestion onto the Project page. What do you think? --Revanche (admin) 18:35, 22 November 2006 (CST)

PHP Generated Star Systems?[edit]

I've noticed that hundreds of planets are not listed with coordinates or surrounding systems much from the periphery and clan space. Though I'm sure I can find them through ISCS and Source Books, and probably has already been suggested and implemented in someway, should a PHP image output complete with an image-map linked to respective planet wiki pages be created for each blank wiki page? At least not server-generated images but generated images and uploaded for those wiki-lost systems. I can contribute to the programming/generation process and then upload outputs for every system not listed.

Also, the 60-light year zoom can be confusing as people (including me :p) may not know where in relative to the entire Inner Sphere the region may be. Some current X, Y coords are still problematic by the way. --Dracoix 04:48, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Dracoix, I know there is indeed issues with the planetary DB and interest in both correcting and improving how they are handled, but I am so not the guy ready to handle this. I'm going to ask Nicjansma (the site's founder) and Frabby (probably our most dedicated planetologist) , as well as two of our code-crunching admins to weigh in over here. Please check back, because I think you may be on to something. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 11:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
See User_talk:Nicjansma#Other_extension_suggestions :)
The datafile on which this wiki's system data is based was an older version of the ISCS atlas and contains numerous factual errors, omissions and typos. Plus, the bot used failed to transcribe the XY coordinates correctly. Bits and pieces of this discussion are unfortunately spread across many talk pages on BTW, but essentially we need to redo the entire underlying database (that includes re-checking all XY coords where we have them, and provide approximations for where not - and then there's my pet project about unmapped worlds where we don't have as much as a clue to where they are). Once this is done, we need to agree on a proper format to present systems because the current system mixes up system names and planet names. And finally some code wizard would be required to create clickable maps from that database, with the option to alter the maps as new info becomes available. I can help collecting the data but I am totally helpless when it comes to coding. Frabby 10:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
I actually specialize in image manipulation and algorithms (watermarks, pixel functions, etc) what shall be thy bidding? >:) Except going through every source book and re-entering systems and planets into a new 99.9% error free database would be a pain. I'll get cracking on a star map tool with labeled image output (as well as CSV output) offline. It can then probably be ported into PHP. However, any image function in PHP requires GD2, server CPU usage, and bandwidth to send the generated image to the user. And yes, I'm just a guy that came out of no where, but I think I can help you guys out on this issue.
Also how accurate were the original 2003 ISCS files? --Dracoix 23:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
They were mostly accurate. I'd say 95% or so. I corrected a few, but not much work was needed. That said, there were probably errors that I did not catch. On a related note, might I suggest moving this discussion to BattleTechWiki talk: Project Planets? --Scaletail 01:15, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Suggestion sensible; move made. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 02:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey all. I believe I can offer a structure to handle all the data elements using Google Maps' new GMapType class. Unfortunately, I'm swamped with work right now and it will be a few days before I can demonstrate a prototype. If you can wait a little bit I can whip together something more concrete for planning purposes.
Draconix (and Nic), if we can get a data host and a sufficient server, we will need three db tables structured something like this (assuming it's MySQL, of course): Smiley.gif
  system_id INT auto_increment,
  system_name VARCHAR(64) default 'name missing',
  system_x SMALLINT unsigned default 0,
  system_y SMALLINT unsigned default 0,
  pixel_x SMALLINT signed default 0,
  pixel_y SMALLINT signed default 0,
  control_id INT default 1,
  PRIMARY KEY (system_id),
  FOREIGN KEY (control_id) REFERENCES control(control_id)

CREATE TABLE control (
  control_id INT auto_increment,
  date_3057 TINYINT default 1,
  date_3062 TINYINT default 1,
  PRIMARY KEY (control_id),
  FOREIGN_KEY (date_3057) REFERENCES sovereign(sovereign_id),
  FOREIGN_KEY (date_3062) REFERENCES sovereign(sovereign_id)

CREATE TABLE sovereign (
  sovereign_id TINYINT auto_increment,
  sovereign_name VARCHAR(32) default 'name missing',
  PRIMARY KEY (sovereign_id)
so we can run queries like this:
SELECT system_name, coords_x, coords_y, pixel_x, pixel_y, sovereign_name 
FROM system JOIN control USING (control_id) JOIN sovereign USING (sovereign_id) 
WHERE system_id=XX AND date_3062=YY LIMIT 1;
Another table might be needed for alternative names, coordinates, etc. The date columns would require a good deal of foresight, unless we approached them like date ranges. Hmmm. The more I think about it, the more I like that idea, but it would require more complex queries. Oh well, a subject for another time.
I hope this puts a bit more structure to the conversation. Thanks. --Ebakunin (talk|contribs) 01:22, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
I suggest not using googlemaps, good idea to keep it stupid simple? I can probably handle the database on my host probably (though it's a dedicated shared server account.) It's a firewalled SQL setup though, can't make external queries, but a PHP "GET" proxy can always bypass this. By the way, anyone have a completed CVS or other text listing all the systems that's up to date? --Dracoix 03:11, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Inner Sphere Cartography Society Archive - fantastic resource, if somewhat outdated. Øystein Tvedten (the BT geographer) helped with the data. --Ebakunin (talk|contribs) 03:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
I already have those files, I was referring to the corrected ones. Funny you should mention about Oyst, I actually asked him about terrain for planets (to 3D model) a year back or so. Long story for another day. --Dracoix 03:35, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Original ISATLAS of ISCS I knew it existed somewhere. Can I use this collected data to build a new database? Or will there be a copyright issue? They seem to have the concept nailed down...Though it's lost to its own site map links. --Dracoix 03:53, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
The original 'Planets' pages were created from the ISCS data, specifically I think this file. Is there an updated version? It looks like ISCS's website has been updated recently to include a lot more info. I used the ISCS data file, in conjunction with a components database, and built a C# app to pre-build the 'wiki-code' for all of the planets. This code is located here. Ideally, I would prefer to have all pages and images pre-built instead of re-querying the database for data that we know is essentially static. Nicjansma 06:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
But that's the point Nic: It's not essentially static. It should be, but it plainly isn't. The data will require corrections and additions again and again, which is why I think we should implement something that can easily be modified with updated data. Frabby 09:29, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
If we're going to go this route, why not just go all the way? Have Sarna simply switch to auto-generating nearly all its content on the fly. There are relatively few things that can't be auto-generated; all of it "flavour". Anything with statistics behind it can be accommodated through automation. Note that this would require partially forking Sarna's MediaWiki installation. --Xoid 05:17, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

PHP Generator Part 2 (Sandboxing)[edit]

(New section on regards to sandboxing drafts.) So we know that the systems are in disarray, and the original data is still useful, and some of the planets may need to be corrected and re-regenerated down the line. I propose an off-wiki sandbox on another site. That way the wiki will not be affected until the draft template and generated images are finalized. First things first, we need an image template basis. I can work with almost anything image related in PHP (job related story for another day.)

I'll start coding the outputs at where PLANETNAME would be the case-insensitive planet/system name and YEAR would be the non-specific control year. I like to keep things idiot-proof and dynamically friendly :). I'll even provide the SQL builds for download.

In all the output would be like a completed wiki page complete with a generated image with image-map links. Input would be greatly appreciated regarding the image template. --Dracoix 16:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

CBT Interstellar Map Viewer[edit]

Take a look at the thread on CBT forums (specifically this post). Bad_Syntax is working on a planetary mapping program that does a whole slew of things, including mapping jump routes. For us, what jumped out at me was the program will link directly to a planet's BTW article. I'd love to see a real move to formalize the articles, ala BattleMechs. I know Frabby prefers not to align himself with any one project, but I nominate him as Planetary Head Honcho. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 15:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Hy Revanche, i hope allways is fine with you, ähm a question about the Map viewer, how can i put planet data in it, must i have a own data base, or better how is the handling of it, thanks.--Doneve 23:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Terra Re-Organization[edit]

Howdy, I like to bring forth a clean up of Terra planet page. I realize this is a huge task special in wake of Jihad Hot Spots: Terra. However, the article as it stands needs least brief re-do. I feel it would be dis-service to everyone if i went ahead and did it. These things I think need be addressed so when time comes write it.

  • Seperating Terra and Mars into seperate articles: This has been done with planets in same solar systems such as Niops V, Niops VI, and Niops VII. There going be alot info going into this article, Mars going need get its own home. It should be listed as part the system, but should be done via a link or apporiate means bridge the two articles should this be decided.
  • Seperating Era specific info: Lately, articles have been filled with Planet data that specific to certain single year. I'm a firm believer that this should be seperated per era. I think Terra should be done same.
  • Seperating expanded history: I propose that since Terra info is so large scale, that only brief info should be put into Terra planet "main page", and a Terra (History) article should be written up specificly for it. This is of course, decide we should put Battletech related history briefs in some kind of article.

I think Terra article should be re-organized and try keep the Terra page itself fairly neat and not too cluttered, while moving bulk of info on the planet to history or detail page. -- Wrangler 22:13, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I completely agree with you about the era-specific details. The information should be integrated into the body of the text. As for splitting the article up, I agree that it looks like that will need to be done, but not right at this moment. I prefer to see how the article grows organically, then split off the major chunks as they are written. That said, I think you have hit on items that will need to be split off eventually. --Scaletail 23:52, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Aosia in the Capellan March[edit]

So we have no fewer than four articles on the wiki referring to this planet. We don't have an entry for it, nor does the Atlas website. I was wondering if perhaps there was a typo of some kind? Thanks. ClanWolverine101 02:24, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Frabby previously identified this as a missing world on the CBT forums. It is mentioned in House Liao, but I don't know of any official action regarding Aosia. --Scaletail 14:31, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Okay, well, we have it mentioned under entries for Kerr's Intruders, Trimaldi's Secutors, Hampton's Hessens, Bullard's Armored Cavalry and 2987. I believe all of those come from the old House book... ClanWolverine101 16:05, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
I see no reason why an article isn't warranted then. It may not have location provided, but details are onviously provided in a source, warranting an article. I know...Be bold. I'm just agreeing that an article is warranted.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 12:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Owner History and Nearby Planets revamp[edit]

Hy guys, i forgot a consensus about the Planets page revamp's i do on this day. At 1st I like Neulings wikitable idea in the Planet category (Owner History, Nearby Planets), the site is more clearer and cleaner, and i think it is ok when we use this on the Planet pages, any thoughts.--Doneve 17:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Doneve. Can we make a consensus about? Neuling 18:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I am not in favor of using the Wikitable for Owner History (it's a list and should remain a list, IMHO).
I am in favor of using the wikitable for nearby worlds.--Mbear 18:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok, i can live with use only in the neaby planets section, but i favor to the Owner History.--Doneve 21:27, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I realize you like the use of tables. I don't because when I use a screen reader I get a lot of extra information that just confuses the issue. When a list is read I just hear "List with X items. Item 1 link 2750 dash link Terran Hegemony, Item 2 link 3025 dash link capellan confederation" etc.
When you change the list to a table I hear "table with one column and X rows. Column one row one link 2750 dash link terran Hegemony column one row two link 3025 dash link capellan confederation" etc.
You might think that the two are equal, but they aren't. There's more (pardon me) crap for me to keep track of with the table, which is a problem because MediaWiki doesn't make accessible tables.
So that's why I hate it when people use single column tables instead of lists. If you like the presentation with the borders and such, I can probably find a way to simulate that via CSS so we don't need to use a table. Would you be interested in that?--Mbear 22:58, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh Yes absolutly, i'm very interested, can you give me an example, and how i can do this by myself, or how i can handle this problem in next time, thanks.--Doneve 23:04, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I stop at the moment the Owner history revamp.--Doneve 23:05, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for waiting on the Owner history revamp. I'm going to ask you to be patient a little while longer; I'm actually working on a new theme for Sarna and if it works the way I want it to it would be easy to set up a bordered list.--Mbear 23:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok, hear you next time.--Doneve 23:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Inner Sphere Map[edit]

Hi Guys, I'm working on an Inner Sphere + Clan Homeworlds Map in my spare time. I don't know how to program so I'm doing everything by hand. I'm using AutoCAD to plot the 2,166 known planets (4.71% complete right now!) as colored, hollow circles. Diameter of 1 unit representing generic planets, Diameter 3 representing a Regional Capital and Diameter 5 representing National Capital (Terra, New Avalon, Alshain etc...) Each planet is then given a hyperlink pointing to the appropriate page on that planet. I'm doing this because in spite of the great work of the Inner Sphere Cartography Society and the Star League Defense Forces Mapping Agency, I'd like to see a more complete IS+CHW map. Despite only having 102 planets so far, it's already starting to look pretty good. You guys, plus the guys at Inner Sphere Atlas have been doing a great job! Also, if you guys know of anyone as crazy as me with AutoCAD and spare time, I'd appreciate if you could tell them about the work I'm doing so we could split the work. Peace! -Volt 03:28, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I've just finished the Kerensky Cluster map, and something's wrong... using the coordinates from page 112 of The Clans: Warriors of Kerensky (with the errata[1]), the map generated looked different from the image on page 114. Using the data from actually nets a map closer to the page 114 image. Anyone know from where the ISATLAS coordinates were taken? thanks -Volt 14:26, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

The IS Atlas page was set up by people who are either involved with Catalyst Game Labs somehow (including their map guru, Oystein Tvedten) or otherwise have proven themselves to be BattleTech experts on the CBT forum. Since Oystein actually gets to make the official maps, I can only assume that he knows some in-house data that wasn't published yet.
For all the experts working on it, however, the Atlas was not made in an official capacity and therefore remains pure fan fiction; it is unfortunately not a viable source for "official" system coordinates.
When the BTW was created, Nic used a bot to set up the system data (and the location picture files showing adjacent systems). Unfortunately, he used an older version of the ISCS map file and some systems are misplaces, sometimes massively. Plus, the bot caused that XY coordinates problem. The IS Atlas site is somewhat more up-to-date, but I don't think it is more recent than around five years ago - it is not current, and I don't know about possible errors.
Finally, there's a German book, Atlas der Inneren Sphäre, that essentially catalogued the XY coordinates and world writeups from all five original house books and provided new maps. I've noticed minor inconsistencies in coordinates, but can't look them up because I don't have the house books in print. (Of the free books, only the Davion book includes the last pages with the coordinates.)
Frabby 18:22, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Sounds interesting, Volt. Will your map have the abandoned/not yet colonised planets of the Starleague/Dark Age era maps? --Dirk Bastion 08:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)