Talk:Operation Bulldog


this is my latest work. I hope yu enjoy it. I have more material for this topic => Omnimechvariant with Clantech for IS omnis and maps. When you are interested le me know.Neuling 21:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Very nice work.. but you might want to wikilink a bit more --Dmon 09:44, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I've fixed some of the wikilinks, and some unit mis-spellings. -- Wrangler 13:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

At last I finished my project and i hope you are satisfied with it, the next project will start soonNeuling 22:51, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Plagiarism Concern[edit]

A brief examination of some of the text (particularly Lonaconing) indicates to me that major sections of the material were directly plagiarized the [from] The Dragon Roars. (This, incidentally, has nothing to do with Neuling's tables.) I would request that other editors and admins give this a look. I believe the plagiarism banner is called for, here. ClanWolverine101 03:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

That's one of the few sources I don't have in any format. However, I trust CW101 does and agree that the tag is warranted. CW, if you'd help me by identifying what material is directly lifted, I'd appreciate it.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 16:31, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Ditto Revanche. --Scaletail 18:21, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Well, I need to go through it with a comb, but it looks like every single individual battle description has been lifted word for word. Don't know who's work that was, but I will keep you posted. ClanWolverine101 20:52, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Hy guys, the work is from Neuling i hope this helps.--Doneve 20:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm doesnt know that the content was considered as plagarism. Can anyone help me please? I will rewrite the articels with the incoporation of the Nova Cat forces but have no idea how could I do that we out the fear to make another plagarism. Tnx Neuling 23:31, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Neuling - I'd like to help you. But do you honestly know what plagiarism is? A lot of that text was copied word-for-word from the book, and that is not okay. Can you tell me what wasn't copied? ClanWolverine101 15:29, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
I take alot of the information from a web side which is down or closed. I think it is best to rework every single planet with information from the field manual update. I can make a sub section of my personal site, where I can provide you with the correct content and you could rewrite the text to different/unique style. Lets begin... Neuling 16:06, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
I can see now why Neuling had no idea it was plagiarism. Since it was copied from another site, and because that site didn't cite the official source, he assumed it was written by that site's author(s).
Neuling, this is exactly why a) we do require references for every citation (and are free to delete contested data) and b) why we also require that only official sources be used. Data acquired from another site could very well be corrupted with fanon, but now you're representing it as official.
I recommend we delete and start over with a well-researched article. If I get consensus agreement with deletion, the article will be re-written by someone who feels its important enough to write correctly.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 18:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey, I delete the content which was considered as plagarism and I replaced the content with verified text. I had began with wave one and the rest will follow soon. Each planet has it souce and it is hard to write alot of text with onyl one short noctice like the planet was secured in wave one of operation bulldog. With my rework the information getting also more accurate as before. I think one reference per planet is enougth and the units can verified by the deployment pages of dragon roars. Other sources are the Field Manual Update, Field Manual Comstar and other Field Manuals to. See yaNeuling 21:16, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Neuling - I appreciate you trying to resolve this, but why would you copy directly from another source regardless?
Rev - So - its okay to plagiarize another website? Forgive me - that doesn't seem right to me. Granted, I think we should be allowed to take from one article on the wiki and post to another. After all, we have fair-use policies and so on. But other website's aren't usually free to use in a word for word context. Granted, I have used some myself when I believed the material to be based on canon material, but I always rewrote it and put in a "citation needed" tag. ClanWolverine101 22:43, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


No, it is not proper to use another website at all, and Neuling's shown why. Only official sources may be used AS sources. Revanche (talk|contribs) 03:44, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I had finished my rework of the article and removed also the plagarism sub. Also written text is from my mind and no copy of the original source. Neuling 17:17, 5 May 2011 (UTC)


The article is complete a mess, i started with double check the reference notes ect. but i stop do this, some ref. notes don't match refered page numbers ect. ect.--Doneve 16:00, 29 May 2012 (PDT)

Even given my rather obsessive editing tendencies, I'm forced to agree. Nuclear-Fridge (talk) 07:15, 10 June 2013 (PDT)
Shouldn't we move all the citations from the planet name to at the end of the outcome? It has made citations pop up in the table of contents and just looks bad. Also, I changed the "+"'s to commas to better organize the attacking/defending parties. I'll be completely overhauling this page now, so tell me if I am doing something wrong. -BobTheZombie (talk) 23:14, 1 August 2013 (PDT)
I noticed that there are units called "Amphigean"; is this supposed to say "amphibian", or is the original correct? -BobTheZombie (talk) 23:20, 6 August 2013 (PDT)
Amphigean is the correct unit name.--Doneve (talk) 23:36, 6 August 2013 (PDT)
Okay, thanks; I'll be sure to leave it be (and change any back that I might have changed). -BobTheZombie (talk) 09:10, 7 August 2013 (PDT)
If in doubt, the best way to check is to dig out any references you can find in the article and check them - assuming that someone's put references in to begin with. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 09:19, 7 August 2013 (PDT)

Page revamp[edit]

Its an idea to remove the mess of the page. We move the wave's content to the planet pages but not in one to one format from the page, we can remove the Attackers, Defenders and Outcome headers and write sarna standard content, to some linked planets, we have ref. notes and can datamine this. And as second Operation Bulldog must become a comple History overview, some details can linked to the various planet pages.--Doneve (talk) 18:42, 7 August 2013 (PDT)

Its a shame that the content of that site is removed/relocated without any further improvement. The purpose of the page was to show the stages of Operation Bulldog and which units where involved. I discover now that my work was useless when parts are taken away and the overall concept is destroyed. But I'm only a little writer for and have not the wisdom understand the higher mechanism sofare. In the future I will only provide maps and nothing further, because its make me sad when the work is overhauled without any gain. Neuling (talk) 23:04, 14 August 2013 (PDT)
First, no one opposed Doneve's proposition above, let alone commented on it, so we went ahead with it. Second, I'm sorry, but I can't add new info to the wiki because I don't own any sources; I can't stress that enough, so don't expect me to do something that I can't. Third, it has not been destroyed, just changed; that's why there is the history section, so you can go back if my edits are so horrible. Fourth, a table could tell the same info in a more organized way, which is what I was aiming at; we can still include all the previous info, we just have to discuss this more. Fifth, please don't let this discourage you from fully contributing, I don't mean to destroy your happiness; you are a valuable asset to Sarna and our numbers are ever dwindling as of late, so we can't afford to lose any help. -BobTheZombie (talk) 13:12, 15 August 2013 (PDT)
I disagree with Neulings comment, we don't destroy anything! The formating of the page was horrible with so many typos, grammers, not working links, and we fix this. As second we have links on the main page so he come quickly to the various actions there took place during Operation Bulldog, any though.--Doneve (talk) 13:29, 15 August 2013 (PDT)
Correct. We shouldn't be losing any info, we are merely moving the bulk of it to the planet pages. Even for relatively short conflicts its just too much confusing info for one page. Conflict pages should be overviews, listing the planets, units and overviews of the entire conflict and each wave, but the blow by blow should be on the unit and planet pages themselves. Cyc (talk) 14:04, 15 August 2013 (PDT)
I think you don't understand my intention for that page. I create the site as an overview for Operation Bulldog. Nothing more, nothing less. I give up to discuss about that topic. Take the content and make with it what you think. I will not write any new content for sarna, because it was changed to many times in the past. I find a way to create my work without any interference from others and my works is respected in the community. When necessary I supply sarna in the near future with additional maps and pictures. With best regards Neuling (talk) 23:22, 15 August 2013 (PDT)
I think it is possible to maintain the page as an overview for Operation Bulldog, while shoveling off minute to their respective planet/unit pages to make it easier to navigate. When I went and redid Invasion corridor - Clan Ghost Bear and Invasion corridor - Clan Smoke Jaguar they were both a mess, with information missing or given in hard-to-understand short sentences; I think the person who wrote them had English as a second language. Besides cleaning up the individual battle subtitles I also went and gave a general overview of each Wave's progress, referenced from the original source material. The same I think could work for this and other major campaigns: a short prologue detailing the events leading up to the Operation Bulldog, the Operation itself broken down into Waves with a few paragraphs giving an overview of each wave's progress and highlighting certain important individual battles, a chart or list for the minor battles in each Wave, then an aftermath section. The minor battles, which just list attacker/defender/major battle sites and short outcome, can be transferred mostly as-is with only minor alterations. If/when I have the time I'll probably do the same for those Invasion corridors. LittleWolf (talk) 12:09, 16 August 2013 (PDT)
That may work temporarily, but look at how long that article is! I think that we should keep away from making such massive pages and instead focus on breaking it down to a smaller level; if there was just a chart and an overview, you would have all the information you'd need, just in a more manageable format. At the very least we need to copy down these pages' info to the planetary pages so that they can have more fluff; they are currently so barren. -BobTheZombie (talk) 12:47, 16 August 2013 (PDT)
I'm finished with the major revamping for this page; perhaps we could use this as a template for converting other Operation pages into condensed forms? What are your thoughts? -BobTheZombie (talk) 21:19, 6 October 2013 (PDT)


The page states that Jeanette was invaded in both the 1st and 2nd waves, and the outcome is the same (defenders taken as bondsmen). I looked back at the history and both entrees claim the same reference, so does anyone know how this can be explained? -BobTheZombie (talk) 11:41, 16 August 2013 (PDT)

Hm, i think it was a copy and past failur by Neuling.--Doneve (talk) 11:43, 16 August 2013 (PDT)
But then which wave was it that it was invaded in? -BobTheZombie (talk) 11:57, 16 August 2013 (PDT)