I just really enjoyed the idea of this article. Not the book; it sounds quite bizarre that it made it to print. But the fact that such a detailed article was written about this, fully describing the controversy (for lack of a better word), the various errors as well as the standard your work, Frabby. Sincerely.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 16:23, 5 September 2013 (PDT)

Thanks for the flowers! It's coverage of these odd BattleTech items that makes Sarna shine imho, so covering them here is one of my key interests. I wasn't aware of the existence of this book myself until I found a copy for mere two Euros listed in a second-hand bookstore's ebay sales. I've seen three more copies pop up since, with the price going up to a whooping 36 Euros for the last one sold around half a year ago - it seems to have become something of a collector's item, which I attribute to Sarna.
As for how this book could ever make it to print, Machtwortverlag apparently amounts to self-publishing, judging from their profile. I have clarified that in the article. Frabby (talk) 00:40, 6 September 2013 (PDT)
You think this article caused it's value to rise? By highlighting its existence? --Revanche (talk|contribs) 16:07, 6 September 2013 (PDT)
Honestly? Yes. I reckon Sarna is the to-go adress for BattleTech lore now. And for this queer kind of stuff the article seems to be the only english-language coverage when googling. Frabby (talk) 02:48, 7 September 2013 (PDT)
That's awesome. I don't disagree with you. The places far-removed from TT BattleTech I've seen link to Sarna are fun to find. In a bit of self-aggrandizement, I'll sometimes follow the link, to see if I have touched that article.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 06:28, 7 September 2013 (PDT)
If you're willing to share some highlights, I'd love to hear about some of the places referencing Sarna - I don't read many forums online these days, and it seems as if the lions share of comments about Sarna on the CGL forum are negative, which is a little depressing. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 07:10, 7 September 2013 (PDT)
Here's two obvious ones that jump out at me...I'll send you some others as I come across them. (They don't stick in my consciousness very long.):
--Revanche (talk|contribs) 07:45, 7 September 2013 (PDT)
Wait, why would people hate on Sarna? It's constantly improving and we take great care of it; it doesn't help that we only have 40-50 active users, and if people would stop whining and instead contribute, it would help even more. Besides, Sarna is the best BT source online, period.
Oh, I've noticed more and more Sarna links on No Guts No Galaxy as of late; I even try to advertise on the site a tiny bit ;). -BobTheZombie (talk) 12:42, 7 September 2013 (PDT)
That's awesome; good job! Do you know if they ever mention it on the podcast (aside from Nic's appearance)?
As for why, I have some suspicions: some failed attempts to do individually what we've done collectively, mis-understanding of how collaborative efforts in wiki form work, lingering emotions when we re-focused on canon vice fanon (thereby cutting some peoples' attempts to self-advertise). But, in the end, it's the fans that do use us that vastly outnumber the vocal minority.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 13:15, 7 September 2013 (PDT)
I haven't been keeping up with the podcasts as much as I should, but the podcast hosts (especially SeanLang) link to sarna regularly. There was one thread that was about what Clan Mechs people wanted to see in MWO; many of the responses had Sarna links in them, which made me very happy. -BobTheZombie (talk) 13:34, 7 September 2013 (PDT)
People don't hate Sarna. I think we're a "valued" community asset - people know and use Sarna a lot, but they won't neccessarily harp about how great the site is. I never personally expected positive feedback. On the other hand, Sarna is just an independent fan wiki at the end of the day. Some people (quite correctly) opine that a wiki shouldn't ever be taken as gospel as a matter of principle. And among 17k articles there are undeniably those with various issues. I don't feel it's a bad thing when errors on Sarna are discussed in a public forum, as it gives me the opportunity to a) possibly identify and correct false information here and b) defend, explain & advertise the Sarna BTW to an audience who may have been oblivious to Sarna before while they're actually reading with interest (because Sarna was slammed, that always garners interest). In this sense, there is no such thing as bad press. :) Frabby (talk) 03:42, 8 September 2013 (PDT)