Sarna News: Crossing Generations

User talk:BrokenMnemonic

Archive - 2012 - Factions, Project Planets, mapping, SLDF units
Archive - 2013 - Individual Ship work, Project Planets work, mapping, template work
Archive - 2014 - Sources needing updates, sourcebook searches, ships needing articles, new infoboxes

Welcome[edit]

Welcome, BrokenMnemonic, to BattleTechWiki!

We look forward to your contributions and want to help you get off to a good strong start. Hopefully you will soon join the army of BattleTech Editors! If you need help formatting the pages, visit the manual of style. For general questions go to the Help section or the FAQ. If you can't find your answer there, please ask an Admin.


Additional tips
Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the wiki:

  • For policies and guidelines, see The Five Pillars of BattleTechWiki and the BTW Policies. Another good place to check out is our market of Projects, to see how the smaller communities within BTW do things in their particular niche areas.
  • Each and every page (articles, policies, projects, images, etc.) has its very own discussion/talk page, found on the tab line at the top of the page. This is a great place to find out what the community is discussing along that subject and what previous issues have already been solved.
  • If you want to play around with your new wiki skills, the Sandbox is for you. Don't worry: you won't break anything. A great resource for printing out is the Wiki Cheat Sheet.
  • Also consider writing something about yourself on your UserPage (marked as "BrokenMnemonic" at the top of the page, though only do this if you're registered). You'll go from being a 'redshirt' to a 'blueshirt,' with the respect of a more permanent member.
    • This is really helpful for the admins as we will know you're a human rather than a spambot and we won't block and delete you accidentally.
  • If you're not registered, then please consider doing so. At the very least, you'll have a UserPage that you own, rather than sharing one with the community.
  • Introduce yourself at the new user log.
  • In your Preferences, under the edit tab, consider checking Add pages I create to my watchlist and Add pages I edit to my watchlist, so that you can see how your efforts have affected the community. Check back on following visits by clicking on my watchlist.
  • If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random button in the sidebar, or check out the List of Wanted Pages. Or even go to Special Pages to see what weird stuff is actually tracked by this wiki.
  • Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name (or IP address, if you are editing anonymously) and the date.


Again, welcome to Sarna's BattleTechWiki!

*******Be Bold*******

Leftover To-do List[edit]

Ships to Write Up[edit]

  • Interstellar Operations Beta
    • League-class Talwar, Turk, Tyberium - p. 228-ish
    • Aegis-class Manaslu - p. 228 ish
    • Dropship Vidar Eisenboot - p. 303
  • First Succession War (sourcebook)
    • WarShips
      • DCS Honor of Pesht p. 7
      • Manaslu - Aegis, p. 18
      • Caledonia, Donegal, Furillo - Commonwealths, p. 19
      • Odessa, Porrima - Commonwealths, p. 29
      • Aurelius, Nerva, Vespasian, Vitellius - Makos, p. 19
      • Talwar, Turk, Tyberium - Leagues, p. 19
      • Francisco - Vincent, p. 29
      • Midale - New Syrtis, p. 38
      • Reynard Davion, Samuel Davion - Davions, p. 38
      • Firewind - Narukami, p. 38
      • Hagiwawa - Samarkand, p. 38
      • New Ivaarsen - Robinson, p. 39
      • Minekaze, Shiokaze - Lola I, p. 40
      • Liverpool - Carrack, p. 40
      • Robespierre - Vincent, p. 40
      • Duke Henry, Edmund Davion - Davion II, p. 40
      • Omodaka - Narukami II, p. 41
      • Halland, Stockholm - Congress, p. 42
      • Benjamin, An Ting - Samarkand I, p. 42
      • Tsutsuji - Narukami, p. 42
      • Mizuki, Kiaria - Lola, p. 42
      • Novaya Zemlya - New Syrtis, p. 42
      • Sabretooth - Aegis, p. 42
      • Mercury, Neptune - Vincent, p. 42
      • Sahand - Sovetskii Soyuz, p. 42
      • Black Bear p. 43
      • Galedon - Samarkand, p. 46
      • Impregnable, Indomitable - Tharkads, p. 46
      • Bladewind, Star Spirit - Narukami, p. 47
      • Nightwind - Potemkin, p. 47
      • Blue Lotus - Naga, p. 47
      • Coventry - Tharkad, p. 48
      • Gallery, York - Commonwealths, p. 48
      • Radstadt - Samarkand, p. 48
      • Akiko, Maji - Lolas, p. 48
      • Anthemius, Heraclius - Mako, p. 48
      • LCS Ironwood - Aegis, p. 48
      • DCS Jarett, Sawyer - Essex, p. 48
      • Agrippa, Sorunda - Atreus, p. 54
      • Mica Liao - Du Shi Wang, p. 54
      • Solstice - Soyal, p. 54
      • Ospina, Otavalo - League IIs, p. 54
      • Agrippa (again) - Atreus, p. 56
      • Oràn, Ocuri - League II, p. 56
      • Samhain - Vigilant, p. 56
      • Tianjin - Congress, p. 56
      • Ragusa - battleship, p 56
      • Minsck, Warsaw - Lolas, p. 56
      • Zulfiqar - Black Lion, p. 56
      • Ai Di - Essex, p. 56
      • Vladislav - Vincent, p. 56
      • Khalzan - Lola III or Essex, p. 56
      • Kumbha, Mithuna - Soyals, p. 57
      • Chronos - Samarkand, p. 57
      • Kanata, Majestic - Atreus, p. 58
      • Andria, Avellin - Leagues, p. 58
      • Sundermann Liao - Du Shi Wang, p. 60
      • Calseraigne - Essex, p. 60
      • Pleiades - Aegis, p. 60
      • Chansha, Mount Song - Barons, p. 60
      • Vrishabha - Soyal, p. 60
      • Bucharest - Lola III, p. 63
      • Granite, Endeavor - Aegis, p. 63
      • Devastator, Skulker - Soyals, p. 63
      • Rasalas - Cameron, p. 66
      • Hadrian, - Mako, p. 68
      • Potsdam, Ulm - Vincent Mk. 39, p. 68
      • Constantius - Mako, p. 69
      • Histria Azure - Carrack, p. 75
      • Histria Azure (again), Pretoria Castle - Carracks, p. 76
      • Edelweiss - Essex, p. 76
      • Ineffable, Chaffee - Tharkads, p. 78
      • Despiser - Essex, p. 79
      • Duncan Liao - Du Shi Wang, p. 83-84
      • Bismarck - Atreus, p. 85
      • Karka, Makara - Soyals, p. 85
      • Starlight Raider - Congress-D, p. 94
      • New Samarkand - Samarkand II, p. 94
      • Shōwakusei - Narukami II, p. 94
      • Duke Alexander, Sarah Davion - Davion II, p. 95
      • Marlette - Robinson, p. 96
      • Eos - Aegis, p. 96
      • Parin - Concordat, p. 101
    • JumpShips
      • Lucian Bell p. 18
      • Michael Rose - Monolith, p. 46
  • Touring the Stars: McEvedy's Folly
    • Galapagos - "terraforming vessel"

Awards Log[edit]

Rev used to keep a log of awards given throughout the year to use as a reference when it comes to the Founders Awards each year - not that I'm all modly, I suppose it'd be a sensible idea to do the same thing.

20-Feb-2014 All Purpose Award (I) - Aldous - St. Ives
27-Feb-2014 All Purpose Award (I) - Panzergraf - Adding to individual ship articles
27-Feb-2014 Random Act of Appreciation (I) - Silverwolfsigil - First dozen spelling fixes
28-Feb-2014 Casual Edit Award (I) - BobTheZombie
24-Mar-2014 Assistance Appreciated Award (III) - BobTheZombie - tracking clarifications from TPTB
03-Apr-2104 Casual Edit Award (I) - Kharim - Avatar edit
16-Jun-2014 All Purpose Award (VI) - Cyc - Policing article change
22-Aug-2014 Helping Hand Award (I) - Doneve
10-Sep-2014 Vandal Cop Award (I) - BobTheZombie - spambot
08-Nov-2104 Image Import Award (I) - Cache - updated unit images

Planets/systems that need updates[edit]

BrokenMnemonic,

There are only a couple planets that need updates from a single source, so I've also included some systems that need updates from two sources. Hope that's OK.

A Time of War 
Ovan
A Time of War Companion 
Karachi
Historical Wars of the Republic Era 
Irece, Itabaiana, Menke, Trondheim (FRR), Victoria (CC), Zanzibar
Historical Operation Klondike
Arcadia (Clan), Babylon, Circe, Dagda (Clan), Eden
Historical Liberation of Terra 1 
Apollo (planet), Odessa (also ISP3:Interstellar Expeditions)
Historical Liberation of Terra 2 
Capolla, Fletcher, Saffel, Small World
Necromo Nightmare
Necromo
Total Chaos 
Tharkad, New Earth
Historical War of 3039 
Sadalbari
The Star League 
Zebebelgenubi
OTP REVIVAL Trials 
Foster, Hoard, Homer (Clan), Marshall

Is that enough or do you want some more?--Mbear(talk) 05:42, 9 December 2014 (PST)

Also the Rasalhague (Leviathan) and Winds of Heaven needs a Wars of Republic Era update. Single source! Yay!--Mbear(talk) 05:45, 9 December 2014 (PST)

Thanks for the list - I'll make a start when I've finished the DARW(3130) updates for Dieron and Epsilon Eridani. I'm not going near the Op KLONDIKE updates though - those are basically half of Historical: Op KLONDIKE, and I really don't enjoy reading or writing about the Clans enough to put myself through that... BrokenMnemonic (talk) 06:55, 9 December 2014 (PST)
I found a lot more, but i dont want to overhelm you with this now, but later hmmm :).--Doneve (talk) 12:38, 14 December 2014 (PST)
Uh-oh - how worried should I be? I'm hoping to start rolling out the new planet article template in the new year, and I can see that taking a fair while. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 12:57, 14 December 2014 (PST)
Iam on fire how to see the new planets template, my sarna edits go in the new year only to planet and manufacturing center pages, but when i have a eye catcher i will do to fix it or soms or ect. --Doneve (talk) 16:34, 14 December 2014 (PST)

Nearby System Table[edit]

Hi BM, from which source you added the Nearby Systems. I had in the past a list from Volt, i lost the document and Volt had deleted the document.--Doneve (talk) 01:44, 26 December 2014 (PST)01:42, 26 December 2014 (PST) Hi Doneve,
I'm using a copy of Volt's distances spreadsheet dated the 7th of March 2012 - is that the version you were using? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 02:48, 26 December 2014 (PST)

I got only the System database spreadsheet, not the distances (lost), can you share the distances sheet for me, thanks.--Doneve (talk) 02:53, 26 December 2014 (PST)
How you extrapolate the nearby system distances, from the main name (example: Zvolen).--Doneve (talk) 03:06, 26 December 2014 (PST)
I've uploaded a copy of the spreadsheet here: http://www.mediafire.com/view/p9d1q19qd2av791/distances.xls - It's got all the distances calculated in it already, you just need to sort the table by the planet you're working on. It's very handy, but it's also about 160Mb in size because of the amount of data in there. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:20, 26 December 2014 (PST)
Thanks, now i can help you, i go back to [A] and check the nearby system tables.--Doneve (talk) 05:38, 26 December 2014 (PST)
Thank you :) I'm plodding away slowly backwards from Z - it's not all that exciting, but it helps with rolling out the new article template if the systems tables have been updated. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 06:16, 26 December 2014 (PST)
I've just spotted that the spreadsheet isn't completely up to date - Dalmantia in the Draconis Combine is missing, which makes me wonder if some of the other SL-era DC worlds are also missing. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 11:26, 26 December 2014 (PST)
Happy holidays, kiddies! Distances Matrix The original file made use of a distance formula to measure the distance between systems, but in order to keep the file size to a minimum (88-89MB) I replaced the formulas to the final values instead, rounded off to three decimal places.-Volt (talk) 03:59, 28 December 2014 (PST)
How splendid! Just what I needed for Christmas :) I've had a quick look, and I think this has the Combine Star League era worlds in too? I do have one (tiny) problem though - I don't have the right version of MS office to run it. I've opened it in openoffice, and that truncates the number of columns at AMJ, which is Galuzzo, so I'm missing about half the worlds... is it possible to get a version for OpenOffice? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:10, 31 December 2014 (PST)
According to the wiki for OpenOffice here the maximum number of columns is 1,024, that would be the column for Galuzzo. The XLS version of Excel (2003 and earlier is only up to 256 columns, that would be Azha. Only the 2007 and later (XLSX) version of Excel can handle more than 256 columns. I tried splitting the matrix into four sheets of about 1000 columns each. You can try downloading the file again in about 10-15 minutes (file is currently still being uploaded on Dropbox) and see if you are able to view the remaining systems.
Alternatively, You can download the Systems By Era.xlsx file (link is on my User Page here in Sarna). On that file you can Enter the Base System on Cell E2 and then the cells on Column E will display the distance between this base system from all the 3,139 systems (including itself, which of course will be zero). The file will calculate the distances as you enter the reference system so this might be a bit slower than having all the distances printed out already, but it's a viable alternative.
Also, you will notice that some of the coordinates have changed because I used the 2764 map as the base map because it is more accurate, and I've fixed some transferring errors that I found here and there. Let me know if either of the two files work for you. Happy New Year!-Volt (talk) 06:36, 1 January 2015 (PST)
I see you start from [A], okido i go back to [Z], but before i prepare the spreadsheet to highlight only systems from 0-60 distances, what a hell of job.--Doneve (talk) 05:16, 3 January 2015 (PST)
Between that and the new article layouts, I think we're looking at a year's worth of work. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 10:02, 3 January 2015 (PST)
I could probably update the extrapolated coordinates on my free time. 20 edits a day will get the job done in about 5+ months' time. And that's only one pair of numbers' worth of editing on each page, won't take more than a minute a page-Volt (talk) 17:54, 3 January 2015 (PST)
That would definitely help, thank you - when you update the coordinates in an article, can you change the phase in the Planet Overhaul template at the top of the page to 2? That'll help us track how many articles are in each stage - I've rewritten the various project phases so that we can make some progress, rather than being stuck at phase 0 for another few years before jumping straight to phase 6... BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:39, 4 January 2015 (PST)

Issues[edit]

Yo its a lot to do. But i look on the template and have some issus, i think we are go step by step. At first how we manage the infobox, as example some sections from the infobox like notable rulers, moons, or geographic's like capital citys etc. can we add on the article sections (you do this) but need we this in the infobox? Now is the answer, must we revamp the infobox, or go with to use the template you created.--Doneve (talk) 14:26, 3 January 2015 (PST)

The overall article layout took ages to agree, and I'm a little reluctant to change it, but there are a couple of things in there that make me uncomfortable, like having to define the location of the system as at a particular year in the intro. You're right about there definitely being some duplication between the planet infobox and the article. I think it's reasonable to have some duplication between the box and the article - I don't think it hurts to have something like the planetary capital in the infobox, because the box works quite well as a quick reference. Same goes for the name and number of the moons, because the main article body is where we can put any extra detail we have on them other than the names, like whether they're inhabited, or there are bases on them or something. I think we should do something about the planetary rulers, though - most planets have no detail listed, some have one or two, and a few have lots. I think they make the infobox cluttered when there are too many - perhaps if there are more than three, the infobox should refer to the article body, rather than trying to list them all with dates? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:47, 4 January 2015 (PST)
Ok! I agree with you, but can we remove the notable rulers from the infobox, and added only in the article.--Doneve (talk) 14:18, 4 January 2015 (PST)
Ah its a pain, i go to read my BattleCorps stories, and there is so much planet info, i don't know how we handle this.--Doneve (talk) 07:27, 5 January 2015 (PST)
I managed to get as far as logging in this morning, checking the recent changes page, and then work went nuts and stayed that way. I'm glad to get home so I can sleep some more!
I don't have an issue with taking planetary rulers out of the infobox - I think it's a long enough text field that it would be better if it were covered solely in the main article. I'd like to add a continents field to the infobox though, for listing the names of the continents. What other changes do you think would make the boxes better? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 09:26, 5 January 2015 (PST)
For what it's worth, I've always been opposed to the inclusion of time-period specific information in infoboxes. Frabby (talk) 10:34, 5 January 2015 (PST)
I'd be inclined to agree in general, but I think with planets there are a couple of things that should be exceptions to that rule. The first one is the USIIR codes, because they're literally an unqualified 5-character code - there's nothing more we can say about them other than that they exist, so I think they're better served in the infobox where they can be found easily for reference than within the main article text. The other I'd be inclined to make an exception for is name of the planetary capital city, because whilst that changes over time for some planets, in most cases it's a constant and it's the sort of detail I think fits well with the infobox as a quick-reference tool. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2015 (PST)

Article Templates Missing[edit]

Hi BrokenMnemoic, I'm writing up some articles for Sarna.net, but there big problem. The Help & How-To is (where I think) where the old Article Templates are, which includes frame work to write certain articles which includes Infoboxes, basic structure of a article depending on subject your writing with. I can't find them, I'm resorting to using recent articles as templates because directory for them is now missing. Where heck are they now? -- Wrangler (talk) 09:17, 8 January 2015 (PST)

That's really odd. I'll do some digging, and let you know as soon as I find out where they've gone. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 09:21, 8 January 2015 (PST)
Ok, the article pages are here: Help:Contents. I'm not sure why they aren't on the front page any longer, but I suspect it must be something that Nic's changed, as I don't think anyone else has access to those sidebar boxes. It should definitely be somewhere on the front page, IMO. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 10:16, 8 January 2015 (PST)
Thank you for digging for them. I wasn't sure where to find them. I though i remember seeing them in the Help & How-To section. But it's all different now. It's always been in the Editing BTW as long i can remember editing here since 2009. -- Wrangler (talk) 11:54, 8 January 2015 (PST)
I've asked Nic if he can put them back into the same sidebar box - I hadn't even noticed that they hadn't gone, so I'm grateful you flagged up that they were missing. Hopefully they'll be back soon... BrokenMnemonic (talk) 12:09, 8 January 2015 (PST)
Hi. Templates aren't back yet. -- Wrangler (talk) 17:02, 15 January 2015 (PST)
I flagged it up on Nic's talk page and had a follow-up question from him - he's the only one with access to fix it as far as I can tell, so until he does there's nothing more I can do, I'm afraid. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 23:50, 15 January 2015 (PST)
You did what you could do, I'm only the messenger. I can try e-mail him as part of a reminder if you want, i don't want annoy him. Its going hurt people trying to edit here. It may out right discourage folks. -- Wrangler (talk) 03:58, 16 January 2015 (PST)
I think from what I've seen on twitter he's just busy at the moment, but he's usually on here fairly regularly - I'd give him another few days yet. If it hasn't been fixed by the time I go to bed on Sunday, I'll see if I can embed the link somewhere in the main page I can edit. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 09:34, 16 January 2015 (PST)

Bristol[edit]

If you could check this talk page, that'd be great! -BobTheZombie (talk) 20:08, 16 January 2015 (PST)

Triabad[edit]

Hy, BM. I found this new system Triabad in Field Report 2765: Periphery, p. 25. Ah its misspelt the correct name is Tirabad.--Doneve (talk) 13:39, 18 January 2015 (PST)

Planet Overhaul[edit]

Hy, i started to add the new template, but i do this not on all pages, its to much content input for my brain at this time, like the Zurich and Zosma page, but i correct the system and nearby systems coordinates, and focus on some pages with basics like the Zuhbehr page.--Doneve (talk) 11:15, 22 January 2015 (PST)

I've slowed down with the new article template as well - it does take a fair amount of time swapping them across. Don't owrry, though - updating the coordinates and the nearby systems sections is a huge help. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 23:30, 22 January 2015 (PST)

THS Monitor[edit]

Hey BrokenMnemonic, be careful when you ask the CGL people about canon status of the Monitor. Last two times I did that, they ended up destroying canon just to make a point. Monitor may end up being erased. If you feel it's necessary, you can suggest by asking if the Monitor was a prototype Essex on trials when it did the mission. -- Wrangler (talk) 04:39, 28 January 2015 (PST)

I debated posting up an Ask The Writer question about the Monitor, but I thought I'd bring it up in the WarShip of the Week article to see if the author of the article would comment. I think that it's just a simple errata of one kind or another, but the ATW forum has been a bit hit and miss for getting answers for the last year or so. If the writer mentions in the WOTW article that one or other fact is an error, then it can go in the official errata thread, but at the moment it seemed best to simply flag up the inconsistency in the article here and leave it at that for the moment. I'm a little wary of becoming the annoying person who asks so many questions that I just start getting default "that hasn't been clarified in canon yet" responses. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 05:30, 28 January 2015 (PST)
My experience with Cruiser, when i noticed the problem with intro dates to resulted in 25 year later thing. Author of the fluff agreed with me i had it right, but it seem out of spite dare i say? They changed it decades later. I have great reasons not bring things to their attention anymore when it comes to sensitive old info. -- Wrangler (talk) 12:04, 28 January 2015 (PST)

Planet Names[edit]

Hi hope all is well. I read your statement about planet names, i realize that somme [A] named planets located in the Star League era, Word of Blake or Republic of the Sphere sectors, i dont know if CG work from Terra with alphabetice the systems down to the Inner Sphere powers (but is a good question).--Doneve (talk) 04:11, 16 February 2015 (PST)

Hihi, everything's going ok here. A few changes at work are making life a bit more difficult, and I'm starting to see work for the con ramp up as the date of the next convention get closer, but I'm ok. How're you doing? I've not run the numbers yet, but I'd not be surprised if 10% of the known systems start with an "A". BrokenMnemonic (talk) 11:48, 16 February 2015 (PST)

Hi[edit]

Hope live is ok, sorry but iam at this time a little bit down to help on planet updates. I hope i check in next week to help out, but my wife has the last word, iam not in good health, sent you a e-mail of status in next days.--Doneve (talk) 14:06, 17 March 2015 (PDT)

Your health and wife come first - the planets can and should wait. They aren't going anywhere, ignoring jokes about the constant expansion of the universe over time. I hope that your health improves and that you get the chance to rest up. Keep in touch, ok? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:06, 18 March 2015 (PDT)
Hi, iam back and now can help out with the planet pages :).--Doneve (talk) 04:47, 1 May 2015 (PDT)
Hi! It's great to see you again. How're you feeling? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:17, 2 May 2015 (PDT)
Iam feeling very good at this time, oh Handbook: House Kurita is availible, new maps maps maps ;).--Doneve (talk) 03:29, 2 May 2015 (PDT)

Battle of Harrow's Sun[edit]

BM - Was hoping you could give Battle of Harrow's Sun a look. Thanks. ClanWolverine101 (talk) 21:36, 22 March 2015 (PDT)

Hey - Thank you for copyediting my Battle of Harrow's Sun article. I'm trying to restart the tradition of giving awards to eachother. Have a Casual Edit Award, 5th ribbon on me. ClanWolverine101 (talk) 05:41, 31 March 2015 (PDT)
Thank you for the award. Getting a chance to look over the article was a nice break from editing planet articles! The two NAIS guides to the Fourth Succession War were largely responsible for getting me into BattleTech to begin with, so I have a particular fondness for the events that went on during the war. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:44, 1 April 2015 (PDT)

Semantic timetable on Planetpages[edit]

Hi BM, i hope the convention works. Well i came up to the Category:Wars page and saw the timetable, now i pocke a little bit around if we can use this for the planet pages to change the list form of the [political affiliation]/[owner history] in a timetable, this link helps [1], what do you think.--Doneve (talk) 13:54, 3 May 2015 (PDT)

I think the problem with trying to turn the political affiliation section into a timeline is that we don't have timeline data - we've got a series of data points, in most cases. There are some planets where the books say that "planet X was a Lyran holding until 2937..." where it would work, but in most cases our historical records are incomplete. That's why I argued against us saying, based on the maps, things like "planet X remained a Federated Suns holding throughout the first two Succession Wars..." because we don't know if it actually did - we just know that on the two dates where we have it on a map, it was a FedSuns world.
I do like what you've done on the wars timeline though - it's making me think I should write up some more of the wars on here when I get a chance. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:43, 4 May 2015 (PDT)

Support vehicle templates[edit]

Thanks for getting to this. I meant to but it got lost in the shuffle. One question: Should the Equipment and Capacities header read Equipment and Capabilities instead? (I don't understand why it has Capacities in there.)--Mbear(talk)

I've responded to my talk. -- Wrangler (talk) 04:51, 8 May 2015 (PDT)
Hi BrokenMnemonic, I'm trying out now. There some changed I'd like you to do and question I'm asking. Addition: I need a optional line for "Equipment Rating" right below Movement type line in the Infobox. If you look in TRO: Vechicle Annex (Revised), you'll see it in the infobox in the articles. I sorely need that one in there. All Support units use this. Question: Armor. You have separate line to put the rating of the armor. Way it's right now, I need put "BAR" in the Armor line, then adding the number rating for the BAR. Is that what you intended to be like? -- Wrangler (talk) 13:04, 11 May 2015 (PDT)
For the Armour and BAR fields, the way I saw it working was this: if the armour is standard armour or a more advanced type of armour, like one of the ferro-fibrous derivatives, then the Armour field would have the type and name of the armour "Durallex Standard", "Defiance Heavy Ferro-Fibrous", etc, and the BAR field would be left blank. However, if the armour was something that has a BAR rating, like commercial, heavy commercial, etc, then the Armour field would have the name and type of the armour - "Light Commercial", "Heavy Commercial", etc, while the BAR field would give the BAR rating of that armour - "BAR 5", "BAR 10", "BAR 8", etc. For the Prometheus Support Vehicle, as it has a commercial armour type, I put the type of the armour in the Armour field, and the BAR armour rating of the armour in the BAR field. If it had been given standard armour, then I would just have written "Standard" in the Armour field and left the BAR field blank. Does that make sense? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 23:51, 11 May 2015 (PDT)
It does, but the problem lies in that many of the support vehicles do not say what kind of "commerical" "Heavy Industrial" etc armor they have, they just say BAR rating. I'll just put BAR in the armor line and then type in number below. Sorry trouble ya! -- Wrangler (talk) 06:56, 12 May 2015 (PDT)
Production Year line gives errors. I've never had good luck putting information in that line. -- Wrangler (talk) 07:16, 12 May 2015 (PDT)
If your not able to fix the Production Year line in the info box, do you know who be? It's really bad error that prints up in the infobox. It comes up as non-sense. -- Wrangler (talk) 18:16, 22 May 2015 (PDT)
I've just tested the Production Year field, and it seems to be working. The Production Year field uses the Year Reference field to create it's own reference; this is what I added to the Hector article:

| Production Year = 2500
| Year Reference = <ref>[http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4285/hector-road-train-tractor-standard MUL Profile for the Hector Road Train Tractor - Introduction Year Only]</ref>

I used the Phoenix Hawk as an example to check what I should be putting in, as that one works. I think if the Production Year field is breaking for you, it's breaking for one of two reasons: 1) You may be putting the date inside double square brackets in the Production Year field (you don't need to do that, the template does it) or 2) you're trying to put the reference for the date in the Production Year field, which you shouldn't be doing - it needs to go in the Year Reference field instead. The Production Year that shows up in the infobox when you view the article is actually two fields showing up in one infobox row. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:39, 23 May 2015 (PDT)

XTRO: Republic I Request[edit]

Hey Broken, With Republic opening up soon, i want call couple vehicles since your aerospace fan. I really don't want race and compete with you or others to try put article in, do you mind me calling dibs on Castrum Pocket WarShip and Strix Stealth VTOL? -- Wrangler (talk) 11:06, 9 May 2015 (PDT)

Hi Wrangler, I do love my spaceships. I haven't picked up XTRO: Republic I yet though, and money's going to be tight for the next couple of months - if you're willing to do the units then you've got free reign Smiley.gif BrokenMnemonic (talk) 12:12, 9 May 2015 (PDT)

Thanks![edit]

For your help with the Support Vehicle stuff, please take this: Problem Solver Award, 1st ribbon --Mbear(talk) 05:10, 11 May 2015 (PDT)

Shiny! Thank you - I've never had one of those. I think I tend to cause more problems than I solve Wink.gif BrokenMnemonic (talk) 23:54, 11 May 2015 (PDT)

Task Force Serpent edits[edit]

Hey Broken, I'm not sure if this is up your ally, i'm bit tided up what i'm doing. A non-registered user,110.20.167.217‎, made alot of edits to Task Force Serpent, but the user did not use citations. I'm not sure if the user will get my message about need for citations. Removing the new sections may honk and scare them off, can you see it's possible to add citation or find someone who can? -- Wrangler (talk) 06:29, 22 May 2015 (PDT)

Hi, all what i can say the content is from the novels, but i have only the german's i hope a other jump in and add citations.--Doneve (talk) 07:13, 22 May 2015 (PDT)
I have a copy of the novel (I used it when I was doing the individual ship articles a while ago) but I'm mostly tied up with the convention I'm helping with for the next 4 weeks. If someone else hasn't added citations by then, I'll go through and add some in. I don't think I'll be able to get to it sooner because I can't edit using a novel at work, and at home, all my time is going into the prep work for the convention because of the con deadlines. I've been keeping an eye on the edits to make sure they aren't spam (I'm always a bit wary when an IP address makes a lot of edits) and it's a shame that the user hasn't registered, as that'd make them a lot easier to talk with. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:43, 23 May 2015 (PDT)

Present vs. Past Tense in Articles[edit]

Sorry for the long delay; I made a short survey. Tell me if you think any of the wording should be changed, otherwise go ahead and fill it out. -BobTheZombie (talk) 09:47, 24 May 2015 (PDT)

P.S. You can put the link on the minor news section of the front page if you want more editors/readers to find it. -BobTheZombie (talk) 22:47, 25 May 2015 (PDT)

Ferris[edit]

Hi BM, thanks to remove the Ferris content, i go to my source books and cant found any detail he added, i keep my eyes open on not regristred users, cheers.--Doneve (talk) 03:35, 27 May 2015 (PDT)

i've not been able to check 25 Years of Art and Fiction or the ATOW Rulebook/ATOW Companion (I don't have digital copies of those here) but I can't find anything in the other sourcebooks to substantiate any of the detail in the article other than what was in Objectives: Clans, which has pretty minimal detail in it. I could be wrong, but the reference to the Ferris Guards being wiped out during the Clan invasion suggests that whoever wrote the detail is at least confused between the two different planets named Ferris... It felt better to err on the side of caution. I meant to investigate further over the weekend, but until the convetion's over life is just stupidly busy atm. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:40, 27 May 2015 (PDT)
Ok i checked now 25 Years of Art and Fiction and ATOW there is no info about Ferris, i hope this help a little bit.--Doneve (talk) 04:15, 27 May 2015 (PDT)
That definitely helps - I think we've confirmed that the added detail was fanon. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 04:19, 27 May 2015 (PDT)

More Errata[edit]

I'm sorry to report that there's more errata you can look at, and it's a pretty long list. Help if you can/want. Thanks. -BobTheZombie (talk) 18:10, 23 June 2015 (PDT)

I'm not really in a position to help at the moment, I'm afraid - I'm not getting any time to work on Sarna at home, for various reasons, and the reference disks I've got at work (when I can sneak onto Sarna while at work, that is) only cover Era Reports, Field Manuals/Field Reports, Handbooks, Historicals, Turning Points, Dark Age/Jihad sourcebooks, Scenario Packs, Technical Readouts and XTROs - I don't have all of the Record Sheets to begin with, and I don't tend to put them on my reference disks because they're big files I never really have a reason to use. I'm likely to be stupidly busy in the evenings/on weekends for another six or eight weeks yet before things quieten down, so I may be able to look then, but having read through the errata you've flagged I'm not exactly sure what I'd be looking for. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:45, 24 June 2015 (PDT)
That's no problem; thanks for explaining. It seems as if MBear already took care of them, so no need to worry. -BobTheZombie (talk) 17:40, 24 June 2015 (PDT)

Carver/Liberty system name[edit]

Hi BM, saw you moved Carver to Liberty. I'd like to point out that the planet Carver III was named Liberty; but do we have any indication that the entire system was renamed? Frabby (talk) 04:27, 1 July 2015 (PDT)

Hi Frabby,
Yes, we do - in as much as the name displayed on maps from mid-Jihad onwards showed the system with the name "Liberty" rather than "Carver V". Carver III isn't inhabited - the two inhabited planets appear to have been Carver IV and Carver V (and evidence for the inhabitation of Carver IV is based on a single reference) but the maps consistently displayed "Carver V" up until shortly before 3067, at which point the name changed to Liberty (see Handbook: House Liao, p. 68). There's also confirmation in Dark Age: Republic Worlds (3130) that while the change had been in popular usage during the Jihad, it became official under the Republic of the Sphere when the planet was incorporated into the ROTS. That's been enough of a justification to change the names of 50+ systems across Sarna already (see: Adhara/Trip, Anatolia/Pillory, Helbrent/Andiron, Sartu/Bastille, Ouagadougou/Silence, etc.)
Alternatively, if you're asking if I can definitively prove that the system name was Carver and that the system name became Liberty, then no, I can't, any more than I can prove definitely what the names of all the examples previously used were, because recording where the system name varies from the planet name appears to be very much the exception rather than the rule in canon, as testified to by the fact that having done almost 700 planet articles now, I think the number of cases where the system name is specifically different to the dominant planet name is around half a dozen. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 05:51, 1 July 2015 (PDT)
BT maps are far from consistent... but there is a clear tendency of displaying not the system name, but the name of the primary inhabited world (as showcased by all those worlds with Roman numerals, and a handful proven cases where the system name is something else entirely like Norn for Verthandi). Carver V was quite obviously the fifth planet in the Carver system. According to the Dark Age: Republic Worlds (3130) document, it was specifically the planet Carver V that was renamed to Liberty. No mention is made of the system at large. That is to say, we are never told whether or not the system as such was renamed, too. PS: And yeah, I'm stupid. I meant Carver V of course. :) Frabby (talk) 07:02, 1 July 2015 (PDT)
In which case, it's still correct to update the article to point at Liberty, rather than carver/Carver V, because that's the most recent iteration of the dominant planet name, which is also what's being used on here using the examples above, in the absence of direction one way or the other on system names from canon. I'm struggling a bit to see the issue here... BrokenMnemonic (talk) 10:22, 1 July 2015 (PDT)
I'm just playing devil's advocate - I'm afraid that Sarna will be accused of "jumping to conclusions" over at the BT forum again because we're solely basing the system name change on inference here rather than explicit fact. At the very least, the situation should be explained right at the beginning of the article. NB To support your viewpoint you could point out that it's canonically spelled out in the story Starfire (in 25 Years of Art and Fiction) that systems are usually named after the primary world therein. It's no conclusive proof but it is an indication, in the absence of hard data. Frabby (talk) 12:45, 1 July 2015 (PDT)

Spamm[edit]

Morning BM, can you block User:Terrencepaul33 please, spamming links to external sites, thanks.--Doneve (talk) 00:46, 14 July 2015 (PDT)

Good morning Doneve,
Thanks for flagging him up - I wouldn't have noticed him for a while yet because I was too busy playing with planets articles. I've blocked him, but the site isn't letting me merge the user account into the Anonymous account as Frabby normally does, and I'm not sure why. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:06, 14 July 2015 (PDT)

Warner Doles (Realperson)[edit]

Hi BM, some non-registered user posted this article about a battletech contributor, Warner Doles (person). It briefly talks about the person, but highlights about him being a sex offender. Which i'm not sure if that should be focus of a article written here. -- Wrangler (talk) 13:39, 17 July 2015 (PDT)

Hi Wrangler,
I agree - this is a BattleTech wiki, and unless Doles' conviction is somehow related to BattleTech, it doesn't belong here. Thanks for flagging it up - sorry I didn't get to it sooner, I lost last night to Project Zomboid. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:47, 18 July 2015 (PDT)

TRO:3150[edit]

Morning BM, i dont know if you have access to TRO:3150, i read a lot of posts in the BT:forum the TRO was a compilation of all XTRO's and TRO:3145, now i dont know if use money to buy it or safe my money and wait for Interstellar Operations.--Doneve (talk) 02:19, 23 July 2015 (PDT)

Hi Doneve,
I picked up TRO:3150 on impulse when it came out, as it was part of a bundle offer with TRO:3145, and I wanted an electronic copy of TRO:3145 for the rules and NTNU variants in it. Having been through TRO:3150, the things that have changed between the individual faction-based TROs like TRO:3145 Lyran Commonwealth are:
  • The notable pilots fluff is new
  • There are some new variants in the NTNU section
I've not looked at it as closely as I'd like, because I've been busy with other things, but I think if you want to take advantage of the bundle deal, it's worth getting. Otherwise, if you don't care about the minor new variant detail or new fluff and you already have the various faction TRO:3145s, I think you're better off saving your money for IO. (Or maybe First Succession War...) BrokenMnemonic (talk) 02:57, 23 July 2015 (PDT)
Thanks, i have all various faction TROs and TRO:3145, and i safe my money for IO and First Succession War.--Doneve (talk) 03:09, 23 July 2015 (PDT)
TRO:3150 does reference a type of battle armour (Cavalier II? Grenadier II? I forget exactly which) that hasn't been published yet, so I think it doesn't include the units from XTRO: Republic III - so I think it's worth picking that up if/when it appears. It felt a bit weird to be getting information on the 3146-3150 period in dribs and drabs, though - it makes it feel like there should be an era digest or something out there that gives the bigger picture. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:22, 23 July 2015 (PDT)
TRO:3150, i've gone over it after I bought PDF and it does have some creditable fluff added to it. Partially have buy's regret it, were properly going get the same information when the IClan book is released. If i weren't working for help with Sarna, i would wait until it was printed in paper form. With couple exceptions, there nothing really remarkable in the book to warrant me to buying it. Seriously. I have to agree with you about the XTRO Republic units being only selected ones, from Vol 1 and 2, nothing seems to be new to be from the future third volume. I guess enough holy cain was raised to convince them not to do entire transfer info to this book. Hopefully, we won't be waiting for ever for it come out in paper form or when the Record Sheets get finally published for the new units. I don't think any of the feature units will have record sheets due to them already bene released Unabridged/cutting edge Record Sheet book for RS: 3145. -- Wrangler (talk) 09:44, 23 July 2015 (PDT)
I don't mind paying for TRO:3150 because it's probably one of those books I'd have picked up sooner or later, just for reference - and with it being bundled with a version of TRO:3145, it seemed like a good purchase. I think part of why I went for it is that I just generally don't find the idea of ilClan to be exciting, and I think it may be one of those books that I end up picking up during a discount sale rather than rushing out to get straight away. It's useful that the TRO has pulled in some of the odd 'Mechs from things like TP: Irian too, although it wasn't as expansive as I'd hoped - I was rather hoping that the "new Variants" detail would be matched with some minor updates to the "Deployment" section of each unit, to show what'd changed on that front in five years, but I think it's all the same text. Eh. Still, I've got plenty of planets to keep me busy for the next couple of years... BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:38, 24 July 2015 (PDT)
I'm not too worried about the IlClan book, if it was called something else, people would be just as panicky. Catalyst got what they need, a stir from the users/players/would-be writers/die-hards stuck in the past, people are talking about Battletech. I just not getting 3145 PDF since i need budget it for slew of publications coming. E-publication stuff seems to be linked to this new way of doing stuff, i find it...odd their redress some of the dossier stuff as something else. I guess they need cheap entry, 3150 was 25 US dollars for stuff i already. Only new new was the Inquisitor II which didn't have fluff at all, but from it's precedessor i pieced together from TRO:VAr. Alot stuff read to do for sure! -- Wrangler (talk) 03:54, 24 July 2015 (PDT)
I'm a little worried about the slew of new products coming out - I'm going to have to start picking and choosing what I want to get, and spread the purchases out. The new epubs they're talking about, like the Touring the Stars epubs, sound interesting - but realistically, I'm not sure how much I'll be able to afford if they're going to be pushing out multiple new products every month. It's difficult to accept that I can't pick up everything I'd like to, while people on the forum get so worked up over each new thing. I'm honestly not all that fussed about the Dark Age, perhaps because I never got into the novels, but I'm finding it a tiring era to watch unfold. The Jihad was more interesting for me... BrokenMnemonic (talk) 04:01, 24 July 2015 (PDT)

Alpha Strike Cards[edit]

Oh i forgot a another question, do you think we come in trouble when i upload Alpha Strike Cards to every 'Mech, Vehicle etc. variant, i hope not so, some are free availible on the MUL page!--Doneve (talk) 02:28, 23 July 2015 (PDT)

I'm not sure you'd get into trouble, but I think that you'd hit the problem of not knowing when the cards on the MUL are updated - there's a steady stream of errata relating to the cards in the thread on the CGL forum. I think it might be worth including a link to the card, so that people who want to see it get routed straight to the right place on the MUL, but I don't think it's worth putting the images on Sarna. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:00, 23 July 2015 (PDT)
You are right, a link to the MUL and the cards is better as uploaded every variant.--Doneve (talk) 03:09, 23 July 2015 (PDT)
Being able to go from the individual variants on Sarna direct to their Alpha Strike cards would be really useful, because it means that people could read about the different variant loadouts on here while they browse, which they can't do on the MUL. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:23, 23 July 2015 (PDT)
Hi Guys, sorry for being away so long. If you need Alpha Strike cards, Bad_Syntax was able to dynamically and automatically generate the cards in png format, and the links can be found on his MUL site. The page is very detailed, so detailed in fact that I prefer it to the official MUL. You guys might want to take a look at it, I don't know if it's what you're looking for but I think he has one for every vehicle and 'Mech available as of 3145.-Volt (talk) 04:48, 23 July 2015 (PDT)
Hy Volt, i know ;) i follow his battletechengineer page sometimes, but the problem is its not a canon page! My opinion is he do a much better work as CGL and had some great ideas, but the CGL staff is pissed of and blocked him to the forum i dont understand why grml, and when i link to his page i think it falls under fanon and not canon, then i became some trouble with sarna :(.--Doneve (talk) 04:59, 23 July 2015 (PDT)
oh right, good point. Yeah he does a lot of good work that few people actually appreciate. Wish he'd finally complete his new cartography software so we can plot all the new systems and eras.-Volt (talk) 15:15, 24 July 2015 (PDT)

Combat Manuals accoming!!![edit]

Hi Broken, i'm sure you saw this. but... - WOW!!!!! I guess there going be interesting article on this...- Wrangler (talk) 11:52, 24 July 2015 (PDT)

Wait what??? Is that an unseen Marauder I am seeing?-Volt (talk) 15:12, 24 July 2015 (PDT)
Whoops, missed this (sorry guys). That's not just a Marauder, that's the lead lance of Natasha Kerensky's Black Widow Company. I'm delighted to see that the Unseen issue's going to be resolved, and in a fashion that involves some seriously sexy new models and images - and, particularly where this combat manual is concerned, one from the era where I started playing rather than one involving the Clans... BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:51, 31 July 2015 (PDT)

Ship article names[edit]

moved the discussion here: BattleTechWiki_talk:Project_Spacecraft#Ship article names Frabby (talk) 05:24, 31 July 2015 (PDT)

Talitha[edit]

Afternoon, BrokenMnemonic. Frabby pointed me to this old conversation regarding citations for Talitha.

Because I like to expound needlessly, I'm offering the following: back when I wrote the 2006 additions to Talitha, the direction of Sarna was uncertain; i.e., we didn't know if it were to be only canonical material or allow for expansion of materials based on fan fiction. I was very interested in crafting out a back story for my personal unit, and I had chosen Talitha to be their home of origin, so I sought enlightening material where ever I could. Based on the wording of those edits, the text was probably copied directly from the BattleTech Mercenaries site (or a similar one), as I didn't have the personal library I do now. I probably just assumed it was canon, from an uncited source.

In my research this afternoon, the other things I can source independent of that site are the two Planetary Locations (Monetary Gain and College of Talitha), both of which are (now) properly cited as from the housebook, The Star League. The other materials, in the Planetary Description section, can safely be presumed to be from the BattleTech Mercenaries site, as I don't foresee an official source coming anytime soon for that same (quoted) material. In fact, looking at other planets in that site's database, they want for no details on any of their listed planets, which tells me they fictionalized their own universe. In conclusion, I think the data in that section should be killed with fire. I hope this helps, and apologies for the lingering confusion. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 13:57, 24 August 2015 (PDT)

Good morning Rev, how're things with you?
Thanks for letting me know where the detail on Talitha originated - it's one of those entries I wasn't looking forward to meeting when the planets project got that far ahead, because I was mostly convinced that the detail came from one of the BattleTech magazines. There've been a few things that've cropped up here that've either looked outlandish, but turned out to be canon, or which looked plausibly canonical but uncited and which subsequently turned out to be fanon. It's nice to be able to strike a mystery off the list Wink.gif BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:24, 25 August 2015 (PDT)
Morning back at ya, mate.
I'm glad to hear it. I wish the Talitha article that exists today had been around back in 2006, as it (and a lot of the other planetary articles) are great sources of information today.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 04:34, 25 August 2015 (PDT)
One of the things I keep telling myself is that when the planet project is done, I can go back to adding detail to the individual planet articles again. I know that realistically, the rate at which new books come out means that it'll be a neverending task, but there's still so much detail even in the old House books that needs adding yet... BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:23, 26 August 2015 (PDT)
I hear you! That's why we all need to change gears, quit our current careers and start up work at the Sarna Research Company. Surely there's enough interest to support our mutual habits. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 19:55, 27 August 2015 (PDT)

Status update[edit]

Hi Ed, sorry for the late response thinks of healt works well, and iam on top to help out on the planet overhaul. Some travelling and some ... feel good! I notice your wiki break, i jump in and hope and help you a little bit. Greetings.--Doneve (talk) 14:50, 18 September 2015 (PDT)

Hi Doneve, you sound to be in good spirits! Smiley.gif Work went crazy for me about two weeks ago, and it's likely to stay that way for a while, unfortunately. I was trying to get some work done on the wiki on weekends, but I've either been visiting my new neice or playing multiplayer computer games. I've not played multiplayer games in years, but I've ended up playing Mass Effect 3 or Trine 2 and losing hours and hours Wink.gif I've got some leave coming up soon, so I'm hoping that I'll have a bit more energy after a break. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 12:16, 26 September 2015 (PDT)

Ceiba[edit]

Morning BM, ähm i think you make a copy and past error on Ceiba you added content as Devil's Breath.--Doneve (talk) 00:49, 8 January 2016 (PST)

Blast and damnation. Sorry about that - it's really too busy at work for me to editing, I keep getting distracted, but I wanted to try and get some work done here - I keep getting windows mixed up though. I'm not doing very well so far Sad.gif BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:04, 8 January 2016 (PST)

Twenty-first Centauri Lancers[edit]

I was going to add a note about the erratum, but you beat me to it. It's always good to see dedicated users nailing those things so fast. Thank you. :) Casual Edit Award, 6th ribbon Frabby (talk) 00:29, 26 January 2016 (PST)

Thank you - I saw the errata just now when it cropped up in one of the threads I'd commented on, and it was one of those little details that doesn't mean much but which helped flesh out another small bit of the game universe, so I was keen to add it. Although I should really be working on more planet articles, assuming work is a bit quieter today than it's been recently... Tongue.gif BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:46, 26 January 2016 (PST)

Thanks![edit]

BM - Reviewed your edits to the Battle of Morges. Spot on. Thanks! You are deserving of Casual Edit Award, 7th ribbon. BTW - Do you know if Nic is doing annual awards this year? ClanWolverine101 (talk) 21:37, 3 February 2016 (PST)

I haven't seen Nic express an opinion one way or another, but then from what I've seen, he doesn't tend to - he's launched the awards every year so far, so I don't think there's any reason he'd not run them again this year. Nic, like the sidhe, is unknowable Wink.gif BrokenMnemonic (talk) 23:40, 3 February 2016 (PST)

User 104.156.110.115[edit]

Hi BM, there's something curious going on. User IP 104.156.110.115 added a weird comment with an external link to the Fusillade article. You reverted the edit and blocked the IP. However, I note this is the same IP who posted what seems to be a legit question by a real human user at Talk:Flamer. Could it be that the user is simply infected with malware that added the link? Should we reduce the ban time? Should be drop a note into the IP talk page? Frabby (talk) 06:40, 17 February 2016 (PST)

Hmm. I didn't notice that it was the same IP. It would be unusual for a spammer to drop malware and then post something relevant and coherent - a message on the IP talk page to clarify wouldn't hurt.BrokenMnemonic (talk) 07:15, 17 February 2016 (PST)

3135-3145[edit]

Hi BM, iam a little bit confused about the change in the political affiliation section, when i look on the 3135 and 3145 maps. You changed it from Lyran Alliance to Lyran Commonwealth, but the maps say its the Lyran Alliance!--Doneve (talk) 02:55, 24 February 2016 (PST)

Hi Doneve,
An errata has crept in somewhere - Adam Steiner renamed the Lyran Alliance back to the Lyran Commonwealth after the Jihad (Field Manual 3085, p. 94-95) and on the key for the map in field Manual: 3145, it says Lyran Commonwealth, as does the 3130 map of the Inner Sphere. The only mention of Lyran Alliance is on the maps in Era Report: 3145, which seems to be an error; if you look at the index on page 2 of ER:3145, it lists the section on the Commonwealth as "Lyran Commonwealth" - it's also been flagged up as an errata in the official errata thread by Mendugo and Wrangler here: http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,28396.0.html BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:14, 24 February 2016 (PST)
Aha, thanks i was on travell had only my pdfs with me, thanks to pointing this out.--Doneve (talk) 03:33, 24 February 2016 (PST)

For your approval - Esau Olivares[edit]

Esau Olivares is up. I'd be honored if you reviewed him. Thanks! ClanWolverine101 (talk) 20:19, 10 March 2016 (PST)

Award[edit]

Hi, you have helped a lot of people over the years including myself, but I look at your award board and no one has properly said thank you. Please accept this award, as one you do not have and one you deserve. Dark Jaguar (talk) 06:18, 19 March 2016 (PDT) Direction Appreciated Award, 1st ribbon

Thank you, that's very kind Smiley.gif BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:46, 23 March 2016 (PDT)

For your consideration - Epsilon Regiment (Wolf's Dragoons)[edit]

BM - Epsilon Regiment (Wolf's Dragoons) has been re-written. I want people to know i accepted the critique from BobTheZombie that my Beta Regiment article (posted back in 2013), to heart. As such, this article is about 40 percent shorter, where i trimmed and summarized a lot of redundant material. I feel the end product is superior, and hope others will find it so. At some point, i will go back and perform the needed revisions to Beta Regiment and the other Dragoon articles. But please give Epsilon a look and let me know. Thank you. ClanWolverine101 (talk) 12:58, 16 April 2016 (PDT)

Hi CW,
I had the chance to take a spin through the article this morning while I was at work - I'm stuck waiting for someone to give me access to information I need to get a task done, so I thought I'd do something useful while I waited. In general, I think it's a good article. I've made some amendments, but mostly just minor tweaking - I could see a few places where you'd revised sentences a few times to integrate information from multiple sources, and as a result ended up with commas spawning rapidly or odd breaks in sentence structure. There were a couple of points where present tense had sneaked in, but that's unavoidable given that all the sourcebooks assume their date of writing is the current point in time. The only thing I noticed that made me a little itchy was your use of "their" as a possessive in a sentence with more than one active participant. That was something I was taught not to do, as it can lead to either vagueness or conflicted meaning if the reader isn't sure which of the participants is the one being referred to, which is a particular problem when one is the more important of the two or the primary focus, but another is the one most recently referred to. When that's the case, it's almost always better to restate the participant being referred to by name, so that the sentence is precise.
I think the only factual statement in the article that made me twitchy was a comment about the Wolf's Dragoons attack on Hesperus, where it referred variously to Defiance and to Hesperus as the basis of the LCAF military industry - partly because there's a planet called Defiance near Hesperus, but also because losing Hesperus wouldn't have been the end of either Defiance Industries - which had major plants on Furillo and Kwangjong-ni at the time - or the Lyran military industrial complex, which includes those big producers on Alarion, Coventry and Donegal. I don't have the Dragoons sourcebook handy to check at work, but I suspect that's the original author embellishing a little.
I did notice that you refer to House names a lot when charting battles - is that a reflection of the House and the State effectively being one and the same? I tend to refer to the military service that's involved in an operation by preference - AFFS, DCMS, etc - unless the operation is one that involves attached mercenaries, in which case using the House seems more accurate, but that's just a personal idiosyncrasy on my part. Either way, I'm rambling and people are approaching with work. I hope I've helped a little! BrokenMnemonic (talk) 02:25, 18 April 2016 (PDT)
Something occurred to me that I forgot to mention earlier - you sometimes switch between singular and plural when talking about Epsilon Regiment. Military units can be a bit of a pain to handle, but thankfully it's a little bit easier than trying to work out if a company is a singular or plural noun. In general, if you're talking about the members of a unit or another plural, you can use the plural were - "the survivors of Epsilon were rolled into..." or "the various sub-units of Epsilon regiments were deployed..." - whilst a military unit is commonly a singluar - "Epsilon Regiment was deployed to New Aragon." The exception is if the unit name itself is a plural - so, units with names that have things like Fusiliers, Lancers, Rangers, Raiders and the like in are all generally plurals and should be treated accordingly. "The First Chisholm Rangers were assigned to attack New Aragon" - the unit is a multiple made up of individuals explicitly in the name. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:51, 18 April 2016 (PDT)
BM - I saw your edits and i largely agree.
Regarding Defiance Industries of Hesperus - I will note that at the time they didn't have a factory on Kwangjong-ni, and the Furillo facility hadn't been expanded. (In fact, at the time Furillo produced just a few Zeus 'Mechs, along with Locusts and Wasps.) According to one (outdated) source, Defiance of Hesperus was producing 30 percent of House Steiner's 'Mechs at one point. But i accept that this is splitting hairs to an extent.
Regarding the service/house issue, i tried to alternate. I didn't want it to sound like : "The Davion 'Mechs attacked the factory, and then the Davion forces regrouped and flanked their enemies before returning to the Davion DropShips." Sometimes consistency can become redundant?
I totally get the plural/singular issue. I usually try to use the singular, but i was sometimes inconsistent on this.
Thank you for the copyedits. Have another Casual Edit Award, 8th ribbon on me. ClanWolverine101 (talk) 18:49, 18 April 2016 (PDT)

Round up or not[edit]

Hi BM, i see your changes on some planet articles, now is the question we round the coordinates up or not in the nearby systems section!--Doneve (talk) 05:38, 18 April 2016 (PDT)

Hi Doneve, I've always rounded up to two decimal places, then truncated the distance to one decimal place. I run the numbers through a spreadsheet that produces the code for the table main details for me, if I copy across the planet names and distances. At the moment, I'm tracking down some errors in the data that crept in when my work spreadsheet got corrupted, but I'm also tweaking the numbers where there's a discrepancy. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 05:48, 18 April 2016 (PDT)
Actually, I should clarify that - I round off, rather than up or down. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 05:51, 18 April 2016 (PDT)
And I just noticed Lamar is missing from my spreadsheet, which means I sent an old version to work. Yeesh. I'm starting to think this project is cursed. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 06:05, 18 April 2016 (PDT)

Spreadsheet[edit]

Hi, can you send me a copy of your modified spreadsheet, thanks.--Doneve (talk) 03:08, 19 April 2016 (PDT)

BM i use Open Office to open the document (Exel is gone), is this the same way you descript on my talk page to use the spreadsheet.--Doneve (talk) 00:39, 20 April 2016 (PDT)
It should be exactly the same - I use it in Excel at work, and OpenOffice at home. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:59, 20 April 2016 (PDT)
Hm iam a idiot it dont works, can you give me a examplae (ex. Gitarama, how you sort the spreadsheet and so on....:(.--Doneve (talk) 01:30, 20 April 2016 (PDT)
No problem - my spreadsheet at work only has the systems beginning with E or F in it though, so if it's ok, I'll use Fronc as the example. These are the steps I go through:
1. Delete the text and numbers in columns A and C of my systems converter sheet - those refer to El Giza.
2. Take Volt's systems spreadsheet and sort it by the column that corresponds to Fronc, so that it lists the planets in the left hand column (column A) in order of how close they are to Fronc.
3. In Volt's systems spreadsheet, copy the cells underneath the column titled Fronc (column EJ in my case, as I have a truncated spreadsheet) that are equal to or less than 60 light years - in this case, that's the first five cells, with values of 18.221, 28.330, 28.659, 43.689 and 47.552.
4. Paste those five cells into Column C on my spreadsheet, from the top.
5. In Volt's systems spreadsheet, copy the cells in column A underneath Fronc that correspond to the five values copied before - in this case, the named planets are Cygnus, Addasar, Spencer, McEvan's Sacrifice and Úr Cruinne.
6. In my spreadsheet, paste those cells into column A, from the top.
7. In the Fronc article on Sarna, set up the new systems table by pasting in the new table header from the planets article template, so it looks like this:

== Nearby Systems ==
{|class="wikitable" width='800' style="background: #gray; text-align:center; border: 1px solid black;" ! colspan="8" | Systems within 60 light-years (distance in light years)<br> Closest systems first:
|-

8. In my spreadsheet, copy the populated cells in column M that've been generated for you into the article under the table header:

| [[Cygnus]] | 18.2 | [[Addasar]] | 28.3 | [[Spencer]] | 28.7 | [[McEvans' Sacrifice]] | 43.7 |- | [[Úr Cruinne]] | 47.6

9. Add in any empty rows needed by that manually - three sets in this case, as the bottom row of the table has three blank cells in - and add the closing table characters |} and you should then have a completed table.
Does that make sense? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:57, 20 April 2016 (PDT)

Production Year links in infobox[edit]

Hi BM, When you found time, please take a look on the BattleMech Timetable, Combat Vehicle Timetable, when i go to the year link in the infobox as example Templar it brings me to the site but the 'mech or vehicle is not listed in the table, why who is the failur!?--Doneve (talk) 10:27, 10 May 2016 (PDT)

Hi Doneve,
I don't understand how the semantic mediawiki stuff works, I'm afraid. I've had a look, and I've tried tweaking the Templar file, but I can't see why the code isn't working. I had a look at the WarShip Timetable page, which I know was working, and it's now not working either. I can't see any differences between the article pages that've made it onto the list and those that haven't. This might be a question for Nic, as he installed the mediawiki stuff, unless there's someone else who understands it? I don't know enough to work out what's going on. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:46, 11 May 2016 (PDT)
I talked to Nic, but have no response at this time.--Doneve (talk) 09:06, 12 May 2016 (PDT)

Speed/Top Speed[edit]

Hi BM, I update at this time the TRO:VAr pages, from which source come the speed and top speed entries in the infobox (ex. Hesiod), shut there be calculated, only the cruis and flank MP are given in the TRO.--Doneve (talk) 09:06, 12 May 2016 (PDT)

Upps i have the answer ;):);), sorry to NERV you ;)--Doneve (talk) 09:10, 12 May 2016 (PDT)
No worries at all Cheesy.gif BrokenMnemonic (talk) 12:51, 12 May 2016 (PDT)

Nadia Winson[edit]

Nadia Winson is up, for your approval. ClanWolverine101 (talk) 23:49, 20 May 2016 (PDT)

I'll take a read through soon - possibly while I'm having breakfast, as I like a good read while I'm eating. Is there anything in particular you want me to look for? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 23:44, 22 May 2016 (PDT)
Well, like many of the articles, i noted inconsistencies in the texts. (Under "Notes") If you could make sure i handled those correctly, that would be great. ClanWolverine101 (talk) 23:52, 22 May 2016 (PDT)

8th Scorpion Grenadiers[edit]

Hi, I have recent updated the all Clan Goliath Scorpion and the Escorpion Imperio clusters to 3086. I noticed an error I think with two units and would value your opinion on it. The 8th Scorpion Grenadiers appears to be confused with the Seventh Grenadiers. This started in Warden Clans but seems to continue in he Wars of Reaving. I would be interested in your thoughts on the notes section for the Eighth, and if you think it makes sense? I think the Wars of Reaving section in its history should really be that of the Seventh (I've written in a way that it could be cut and pasted with no editing). Dark Jaguar (talk) 03:59, 21 May 2016 (PDT)

I've checked on the official forums, and there's no errata thread for Field Manual: Updates, which is a little vexing. You're absolutely right - there's an error in FM:U that's led to there being two iterations of the Eighth, one of which appears to be the Seventh. Wars of Reaving namechecks a lot of Clan units, but makes no mention of the Seventh; that's not conclusive in and of itself, as not every unit gets mentioned in WoR, but it is suggestive. Some Clans do seem to have moved units around a lot (the Ghost Bears moved a lot of Clusters back and forth between Galaxies during this time period) but it would make a lot of sense for the two iterations of the Eighth in FM:U to have led to confusion. I think you've done the right thing flagging it up, but it's unfortunate that we don't have a clear instance of the unit being mentioned in error - something like two mentions of the Eighth being destroyed in different locations in a similar timeframe. There's only one mention I can see of Rho in WoR, and that's in the attack on Nueva Castille. Of the units in Rho Galaxy in FM:U, the only one that appears to have survived to make it into the Escorpion Imperio's military is the Fifth Scorpion Cuirassiers, but who are now listed as a part of Beta Galaxy, along with the First Cateran Cluster, and the Third Scorpion Cuirassiers (formerly of Gamma Galaxy, which no longer exists). The catch-all for Scorpion units that've vanished is generally "and they were destroyed in the last-ditch defense of Roche", which would suggest that's where Rho's Eighth went.
I think you've done the best you can with the information available - I've found Ben Rome to be helpful when it comes to pinning errata down; I think the only way you'll get a definitive explanation that we can log here is if you generate an Ask the Writers question, flagging up that there are two Eighths in FM:U and the contradiction with FM:WC, and then ask if the Eighth mentioned in WoR consistently alongside the First Eridani Lancers and Delta Galaxy should actually be the Seventh. Unless it's confirmed by Ben Rome one way or the other, we can't say there's a definite error, but there's a decent chance he'll confirm things; if he does, that's great. If he doesn't, then we can only really assume that it's likely to be an error, but that there is always the possibility that between FM:U and WoR, the Scorpions reorganised their touman and moved the Eighth into Delta Galaxy. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:24, 23 May 2016 (PDT)
Thanks for taking the time to read through and give a detailed reply Smiley.gif Actually very few Scorpion warriors were left on Roche, it appears mostly older warriors and militia. The Scorpion Galaxies that were destroyed were all lost in other conflicts. Rho was intact (although missing 1 cluster) when it assaulted Nuvea Castille and was disbanded sometime after 3080 (another reason why I think the 8th was still part of it at that point). Dark Jaguar (talk) 09:13, 23 May 2016 (PDT)

Founder's Outstanding Member of the Year Award[edit]

Thanks, as always, for your hard work, dedication and amazing contributions to this wiki. Sarna is lucky to have you! Nicjansma (talk) 06:25, 25 May 2016 (PDT)

Mendrugo[edit]

Hi BM, i found this night this very interesting post from Mendrugo, i think you like it Chronological Fiction Review Index , the post is a great help for the planets overhaul project i think so...cheers.--Doneve (talk)

That's seriously useful, thanks for highlighting it - definitely one for my reference list. I shudder to think how long it must've taken Mendrugo to put together... BrokenMnemonic (talk) 23:43, 2 June 2016 (PDT)
I think the same how long he's dataming was :), and all the work on the sub pages when you click on the links, awesom.--Doneve (talk) 03:44, 3 June 2016 (PDT)

Could you have a look at this please[edit]

Hi BM, could you take a look at the Overview section here please. Doneve suggested that you could clarify the standards better, thanks in advance. Dark Jaguar (talk) 23:43, 7 June 2016 (PDT)

Hi Doneve,
Sorry it's taken me a while to reply - it was the annual convention I help run last weekend, and I had guests staying for the week, so I've not been on Sarna. I'll go and have a read now. I'm not sure at this point what the standards are on overview sections, so I'd best do some reading! BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:31, 15 June 2016 (PDT)
Dont worry, i hope you had a great and stress free week Wink.gif.--00:37, 15 June 2016 (PDT)
Not quite stress-free, sadly, but it was a really good week and a great con. Left me feeling like I'd been steamrolled flat, though Tongue.gif I'm still struggling to catch up with everything. Those who came to the con had a good time, and I got to spend a lot of time with friends during the week before the con - and eat a lot of pizza - but I'll be happy when the last of the admin work for the con is done. Then I can start worrying about next year! BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:04, 16 June 2016 (PDT)

Irian[edit]

Hi BM, can you take a look on Irian i stard to add planetary locations, and want a response if it works etc.--Doneve (talk) 13:08, 11 June 2016 (PDT)

Irian looks good - I meant to reply yesterday, but I got interrupted, first by work and then by a charming German lady of my acquaintance, so I got a bit distracted Wink.gif Adding in the planetary location details is a really useful thing - there are so many little details dotted around in books that have never made it onto Sarna, all of which might be useful to writers or those looking to play on the worlds. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:07, 16 June 2016 (PDT)

CGL Forum Quotes[edit]

Regarding what you wrote on your user page about CGL Forum Quotes... I am opposed to your idea. My opinion is that relevant content, especially official rulings on the forums or official chat transcripts, should always be copied to Sarna for safekeeping, and that references should be made to Sarna pages and not to some other pages on the internet over which we have no control. My main concern is that those other sites may go offline without warning and then all the references on Sarna are worth nil. (Remember LinkNet?) See Talk:Blackout for my idea about archiving information on-site. Frabby (talk) 02:32, 21 June 2016 (PDT)

I think you may have misunderstood. That's a reference section I made for myself so that I could quote transcripts from the CGL forum onto here, whilst also being able to keep the links in the quotes, so that people could backtrack to check the sources if they wanted to while those sources still exist. If you look at the talk pages for planets like Clayborne II, you'll see what I've done - I've quoted the text from both relevant messages verbatim onto Sarna, but included in the quote attribution a working link back to the original posts as well, to make the quote as accurately cited as possible. That's how I've been doing things here for about four years now - the reference section is a reminder to me of how to generate a workaround for the fact that the Quotes object on Sarna doesn't like straight html addresses from the CGL site since the last CGL site change, which added characters the Quote object can't handle in weblinks. If you look in the 2016 archive section of Nic's talk page, you'll see a conversation he and I had after I spotted the problem. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 02:41, 21 June 2016 (PDT)
Yeah, a misunderstanding. All good. Move on, nothing to see here... :) Frabby (talk) 03:16, 21 June 2016 (PDT)

Heiligendreuz[edit]

Hi there, i checked the Wolf Clan Sourcebook and there is no info for Heiligendreuz, oh and i uploade the maps you want. I had some trouble by uploading the new map take a look on the log data.--Doneve (talk) 02:10, 8 July 2016 (PDT)

Warhammer IIC & Marauder IIC from MWO[edit]

Hey Broken, long time no see. Hey. Just heads up. We got folks coming on and changing / adding info from MWO website. Like adding A B C D, to the numbered variants because MWO doesn't use numbers on their variants. You may want keep eye out. I had to undo someone's re-arranging of info. I suspect there maybe others coming on and changing things to be "correct" with MWO stuff. -- Wrangler (talk) 17:42, 5 August 2016 (PDT)

The armour tonnage was changed as well, but without a TRO nearby at the moment I can't check to see if this is correct. Dark Jaguar (talk) 02:19, 6 August 2016 (PDT)
Yes, these were wrong, now fixed. Dark Jaguar (talk) 11:16, 6 August 2016 (PDT)
Thanks to both of you for the warning and for moving quickly to correct the edits to the Marauder and Warhammer articles. I'm not an MWO player, and I don't tend to keep digital copies of the TROs at work, so it's unlikely I'll be able to tell if something's being edited to include MWO detail, but I'll try and keep an eye out. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 23:40, 7 August 2016 (PDT)

Question[edit]

Hi BM, thanks for change the independent world to inhabited world its more logical. The coming days are busy prepare for the holidays to visit my cousin in Canada and so on. A Germany tour Smiley.gif, this was perfect you stard in Hamburg, then you move to Frankfurt then we can hang around drink some beer hehe and i can give you a little Frankfurt tour then you can move to Neuschwanstein Wink.gif.--Doneve (talk) 01:01, 11 August 2016 (PDT)

Good morning! I'd been meaning to start doing the chance to Inhabited world for ages, following the conversations that were held last year, but I finally had the impetus to start this week... partly because I keep forgetting to send an updated systems spreadsheet to work! It'll take a while to roll through all the systems, but I've already found and corrected a few mistakes that'd crept in, as well as finding a couple of interesting situations where worlds were settled in 2271 and then gone 70 years later. Colouring in all the worlds in my digital maps to work from took a while, though Tongue.gif
I'm determined to do my Germany tour, and not just because of how much I like German beer! It looks like the trip from Hamburg to Frankfurt should be reasonably easy (a bit long, but reasonably easy) but getting to a village near Neuschwanstein looks a bit trickier. Continuing the tendency to come back from my swimming sessions with odd anecdotes, my hour-long exercise session at the swimming pool last night saw me get adopted by an 11-year old named Dylan who was earnestly giving me advice about his mum's Slimming World diet plan, swimming techniques and the like. While I don't mind making new friends at the pool, I can't say it was quite what I'd imagined happening! Still, I'm now swimming twice a week along with the diet, and I'm hoping to make it three times a week from mid-September, so sooner or later I'm going to lose enough weight to be comfortable travelling, at which point there will definitely be some very large mugs of beer! Which part of Canada are you visiting? BrokenMnemonic (talk)
Ha ha ha, you are the pool master Smiley.gif, but swimming is really the best way to los weight. We move to Vancouver stay 10 days or so by my cousin and then we want to move to Alaska for a week, on sunday stard the tour.--Doneve (talk) 01:33, 11 August 2016 (PDT)

Ship Article Request[edit]

Hey, i know First Succession War going be getting out mortorium, is there chance you leave something for me to do with them. I've not been on much due to my work schedule and frankly lack of material work with. If you could allow me something to enter that would be nice. Such as Soyal ships or something. Admittedly I've not done individual ship articles before, but it be nice to try. I don't think there going be alot with the Soyals. -- Wrangler (talk) 10:09, 30 September 2016 (PDT)

Not a problem Cheesy.gif I'm looking forward to FSW coming out of moratorium - I love the pre-Jihad Historicals, and FSW is one of my favorites. How would you feel about covering all the Federated Suns WarShips, and all those WarShips that fought against them? That would give you some Capellan ships and a lot of Kuritan ships to play with as well, plus you could update the article on the Battle at Cholame? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 13:21, 30 September 2016 (PDT)
Okay, I'll give it a go. It will be a challenge, i'll start writing up battle this coming week so it will be ready when mortorium breaks. I'll get going on this when it ready. I need re-read 1st Succession War again. I want make sure i do each individual ship right. Hopefully it won't be too much a mess. I suspect that the one of the New Syrtis-Class Carriers will be giving my some problems since i think it's contradicting itself when mentioned in the Reunification War fluff. -- Wrangler (talk) 21:39, 30 September 2016 (PDT)
I'm happy to help if you hit a problem. Is the New Syrtis you're worried about the Novaya Zemlya? I think all it means is that the Federated Suns had retired/renamed the Reunification War-era Vigilant and passed the name on to a new ship. It also means that the New Syrtis-class ship of the same name must've entered service after the battle at Malagrotta. It also makes it very likely that, given that the Vigilant-class Novaya Zemlya was active on the Taurian Border during the Reunification War, it was very likely one of those ships destroyed or captured during the Battle for Tentativa. If you'd prefer, I'm happy to do the write up for that particular ship?
One thing it would definitely be worth digging out are the comment from Herb Beas in one of the discussion threads where he confirmed that the flagship at the battle at Cholame as a Defender-class - it's not mentioned in First Succession War, but I remember somebody asking about it on the forum in a discussion thread outside Ask the Writers, and it being confirmed it was a sister ship to the Golden Lion. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:45, 1 October 2016 (PDT)
Whenever the New Syrtis class is mentioned, the (apocryphal) Kitty Hawk class springs to my mind. In my head-canon I've always assumed that these are somehow related, like the former being the prototype version of the latter or something. Can you keep an eye out on this when doing the ship articles? Frabby (talk) 02:35, 1 October 2016 (PDT)
Willdo. I've never seen the Kitty Hawk class mentioned in any of the sourcebooks I've read, though - I can't remember my own phone number, but I'm pretty good on odd details like that. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 13:52, 1 October 2016 (PDT)
Frabby, Broken. I was the one who asked about the Defender-Class Ship at the Cholame. Herb said that the Black Bear was a Defender-Class Battlecruiser. Problem is I don't know if that's enough to satisfy canonical. Defenders were noted to be made flagships in the Defender write up and equipped with mobile HPGs. However Again, i don't think it's enough info on that. I can be mentioned as it was mention it was intended to be one, but without a publish source pointing the finger at it. It ain't canon sadly. Which is madding. -- Wrangler (talk) 20:18, 19 October 2016 (PDT)
Technically, it isn't enough to be fully canonical, because it wasn't mentioned within the Ask The Writers/Ask the Lead Developers forum. However, in my opinion, it is something that should be tracked here, and it's something that is canonical until it's actually contradicted by something official. What I'd do is take the question/response from that thread, and add it to the article talk page, as well as quoting it as a reference; I'd then also include the key text in the Notes field, indicating where the information came from, so that those viewing can see where it came from and why it's not fully-canonical, if that makes sense? I'm trying to think of other articles where I've done the same, because there have been a couple. For me, it's definitely the case that we should consider (and quote) the Black Bear as being a Defender, until something appears that contradicts it, but that we should make sure when we make that citation that those reading know where it came from. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:11, 24 October 2016 (PDT)
I've done about quarter of the Soyal-Class Ships, so far. There information on those ships are pretty flimsy. I do hope there one or two left for the Second Succession War. The original Soyal-Class write up from the Field Report 2765: CC mentions four ships were ordered by the Confederation, but not number for the Mariks. Broken, do you know if there will be other ships i can write up on? Seems like your cruising on your quest do all the named ships. I'm taking my time finishing up the Soyals and anyship related to what they're fought unless it's been done. -- Wrangler (talk) 20:18, 19 October 2016 (PDT)
From what I've read, I don't think you need to worry about the articles being flimsy Smiley.gif I've been working on those ships that were involved in battles between the Lyran Commonwealth and Draconis Combine/Free Worlds League so far, and I've not gotten that much done - I'm just going forward through the book a bit at a time, and when I find a battle mentioned/ship mentioned, I try and do all of the ship articles based around that event. I'd suggest you do the same, perhaps? The other active fronts were Lyran/FWL, FWL/CapCon, CapCon/FedSuns and FedSuns/Combine. I'd like to cover the Lyran/FWL border as well, but I haven't looked at the other three yet - does one take your interest in particular that you'd like to work on? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:11, 24 October 2016 (PDT)
Broken, why did you do additional articles on the Soyal? I thought you were going leave it to me. I wanted take my time doing them so i could write them up nicely. I only got the initial 4 in the beginning of the book. :( -- Wrangler (talk) 19:45, 26 October 2016 (PDT)
I thought you were doing all the ships used on the Capellan/Free Worlds League conflicts, from the articles you'd done? I didn't realise you were working on specific ship classes. Which other classes are you looking to do? I'll stop on the ship articles until I know what you want to work on, to make sure I don't get in your way again. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 23:47, 26 October 2016 (PDT)
Don't worry about it. I'll work on the rest of the ship in that conflict. I was confused since i was laser focus on the Soyal-Class Ships. -- Wrangler (talk) 07:41, 28 October 2016 (PDT)
Both ships still need detail - the Devastator and Skulker were already on here from the House Steiner/House Marik detail, and I simply added the same battle detail that I added to the other ships from the same conflict. They still need the stuff from Field Report 2765: CCAF that you've been putting in the new Soyals. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 12:09, 28 October 2016 (PDT)

Email[edit]

Hy BM i send you a mail via sarna, but i became this message!

The original message was received at Fri, 14 Oct 2016 01:49:34 -0700 from localhost [127.0.0.1]


The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----

<brokenmnemonic@googlemail.com> (reason: 550-5.7.0 Mail relay denied [64.34.161.211]. Invalid credentials for relay for)

i dont know whats going on.--Doneve (talk) 03:10, 14 October 2016 (PDT)

I've tried sending an email direct to you from my account - has it appeared? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 11:10, 14 October 2016 (PDT)
Yep i got it, and have responded.--Doneve (talk) 11:30, 14 October 2016 (PDT)
I'm having a stupid number of problems with the wifi here, but you should have another message this morning - can you let me know if it's arrived? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 01:50, 15 October 2016 (PDT)

Thanks[edit]

Hi BM, thanks so much for your help, my new pc works awesom with LINUX, grml the most work (to configurate LINUX and so on) have done two friends from me, ok i buy the parts harddisk, massabord, etc., all data is now save we installed a little server for my backups, :) cheers.--Doneve (talk) 04:59, 16 October 2016 (PDT)

Hi Doneve! Sounds like things are going well - did you get all the messages through, including the one with the update in? If you're backing your data up remotely, that should make it much harder for the same to ever happen again Cheesy.gif BrokenMnemonic (talk) 05:44, 16 October 2016 (PDT)
Yep i got all messages Cheesy.gif, i send you in the next days a mail, then you can look what happens with the server, its now a little bit work but all works well Wink.gif.--Doneve (talk) 06:06, 16 October 2016 (PDT)

2786 Map[edit]

Hi BM, you asked me for a single 2786 map, i fidling a little bit with photoshop and hope i can create a single hi-res master 2786 map, when i got it i uploade the map for you.--Doneve (talk) 05:52, 7 November 2016 (PST)