Blackwind Lancers vs. 5th Syrtis Fusiliers[edit]

Where does it say the Blackwind Lances turned on the 5th Syrtis Fusiliers? Free Capella was already ejected from the FS by this time. The article gave the impression the Lancers were part of the Hasek invasion. - Aldous

Jihad Hot Spots: 3070 - page 25 - article Confederation Strikes Back! is where intitial report came in. In the Jihad Secrets: The Black Documents on page 18, Operation Thunderstrike, they get into it slightly with more detail, but not by alot. The information is strung out between the early Jihad books. -- Wrangler 19:29, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Article has the wrong name[edit]

Operation Thunderstrike was a general counter offensive in October to gain time/retake worlds. It was launched broady along the front. It fizzled out by November. Source: Blake Ascending pages 184-185, and page 201 that bluntly indicates Thunderstrike was a limited counterattack. Talon Zhan reports that the invasion has been halted by the counterattack and a lack of momentum.

The overall counterattack title should be Operation: Celestial Vengeance (page 202). The article "Striking Back!" mentions the Strategios and CCAF luring the AFFS into the Sian Commonality and then counterattacking, saying "These are only the first attacks of Operation Celestial Vengeance, a campaign to regain our lands from the Davion aggressors."

Again on page 226 Task Force Light Horse is mentioned, along with "all forces" as being in preparation for the " stage of 'Operation Celestial Vengeance,'...". On the other hand, Thunderstrike is never mentioned again after its one article.

Therefore I move the article be renamed, with the first wave and supportive actions of the second wave labeled as Operation: Thunderstrike, and the Task Forces and the remaining waves clearly labeled as being the overall main goal of Operation Celestial Vengeance. Huronwarrior 20:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Totally disagree. I didn't buy Blake Ascending since own the original books; Dawn of the Jihad and jihad Hot Spots: 3070. I believe best way to solve this problem is ask the Writers on the Classic Battletech forums. I dislike random name changes between publications. There too many entries that has Thunderstrike main Jihad Secrets which suppose to be more hard facts than random Inner Sphere canon media confusion to be dismiss the name. Unless Ascending was written in differient way, i'd be compelled disagree with name change. -- Wrangler 04:16, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Further review, The name was originally published in the Jihad Hot Spots: 3070 page 41, the Chancellor Lives does 'Operation Celestial Vengeance. Jihad Secrets: The blake Documents is a NEWER source thus, trumps the old name. Now i'm going check to see if the 'Operation Celestial Vengeance' name is a in house Capellen name. But Thunderstrike is general name everyone in the Inner Sphere knows it as. Reason why Blake Documents still trumps Blake Ascending since its a re-published and not revised article. -- Wrangler 04:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
If its a Capellan operation, its going to have a Capellan name. Thunderstrike was a Capellan name. The articles themselves label Thunderstrik as part of Celestial Vengeance. It seems fairly obvious. -- Huronwarrior 14:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
What is obvious and what writer feel is two seperate things. I try go by what is consistered canon. I try not to speculate or put my own opinions in making these articles. As of the moment, we have not received any word from writers at forums at CBT. So its waiting game now. -- Wrangler 01:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)


When this other problem is sorted out, I'd like to propose that the Sovereign Justice and Thunderstrike/Celestial Vengeance articles be merged, as there is substantial overlapping. Therefore, the entire Capellan March/Confederation war during the early Jihad will be dealt with on one page, rather than two or three. ClanWolverine101 12:13, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm against the merge. if there was name for the war, i'd agree to that. However there isn't. Thunderstrike from Jihad Secrets: The Blake Documents, was written as counter-assault, where Davions didn't do anything but be attacked concentrates. Like wise Sovereign Justice, seperate invasion/campaign by Duke Hasek, only had entries of them Davions perspective. They should be kept seperate. Their both notable in their own right and there links to connect to the other/ sister article. -- Wrangler 17:37, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. I just feel there is a lot of overlap there. But its subject to conjecture. ClanWolverine101 20:06, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
I agree with the proposal, though I will admit that the lack of a unifying name is a problem. I see no problems with having redirects and giving due to the separate phases of the conflict, but there's no question that, whatever the military leadership on either side called it, there was one conflict. --Scaletail 23:10, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Task force Vengenace[edit]

Small Problem : Task force Vengeance is also the name of the Wolf's Dragoons / Allied Mercenary Command failed attack on the WoB at Mars in 3067. This there some way to distinguish this? ClanWolverine101 18:04, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

If they are only sections within a differently named article, state in italics [or in brackets] that it should not be confused with the operation of the same name by the other organization.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 20:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)