Talk:Akira Brahe

This article is within the scope of the Biographies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve BattleTechWiki's coverage of people of the BattleTech universe, both real and fictional. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Death[edit]

Akira Brahe according the Masters & Minions: The StarCorp Dossiers, Akira is dying of a disease. Thats why written up with death in it. At the time of the profile, says he has only months to live. -- Wrangler 18:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Aha...so he yet lives! As author's fiat is very much in play in BT, we have no idea what may yet occur, so cannot presume he will die in this decade. Until his death is reported, it should be left open. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 18:57, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
They stated he has 24-36 months to live as of 3077. Is that enough info? -- Wrangler 19:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
No, because he isn't dead. He lives. By reporting his death prematurely, we're assuming a cure isn't found, that the Manei Domini haven't cyborged him, that he didn't transfer his brain into the body of a 8 year-old girl, etc. There is no need to report his death before it occurs. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 19:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Re-reading what you stated, I see what you mean: you're suggesting putting the deatn date back to ?? and then stating at the end of the article, that he was expected to live only 24-36 months to live as of 3077. Yeah, that works for me. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 20:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, its battletech. If a character is inconvenient, they will quietly die of natural causes in their 60s. (Katrina Steiner I, Tancred Sandoval's father, etc.) If they want to keep them around, they'll still be running around well into their 90s. (Focht, Morgan Kell) Bottom line : Until they're dead, they're not. When's the last time Akira got major attention? And now he's being written off with a disease? Pbbb. ClanWolverine101


Cleanup[edit]

This article, though well-cited and well-stocked with facts, is very rough to read. It probably needs the original Editor to fix some things (ex: "He tells he wants the officers who brought him to his attention that he hearted his place in Genyosha.") that cannot be understood by the available context. It reads as if a lot of facts were typed very quickly, with little-to-no self-editing done. It doesn't need to even be read aloud to realize that a lot of words are missing and rules of grammar violated. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 18:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

"...salvage, stole or out right stole parts..."? I don't get this. Hope no-one minds if I tackle this... Nuclear-Fridge (talk) 02:10, 26 June 2013 (PDT)
You are right! But why you don't look in the editing history and set up a talk to the guy how created the article?--Doneve (talk) 05:43, 26 June 2013 (PDT)
I'm In the process of reworking the grammar of this page, so please alert me if I accidentally change the facts or remove something important. BobTheZombie (talk) 08:26, 26 June 2013 (PDT)
I edited the quote and changed it a bit for grammatical reasons; is that okay?
  • Old: "Down there, I got look beneath ComStar's façade. The Word of Blake is bounded by steel…"
  • New: "Down there, I got a look beneath ComStar's façade. The Word of Blake is bound by steel…" BobTheZombie (talk) 22:23, 26 June 2013 (PDT)
I believe I am done here; the bulk of the rewording is done. Tell me if it needs to be worked on further. BobTheZombie (talk) 09:41, 28 June 2013 (PDT)