User talk:BrokenMnemonic/Planet Ovehaul Template

Political Affiliation

Regarding the affiliation, are we going to list by "milestone" [ie, year where major event took place or where a map is available] and then either put relevant years/year ranges in between where systems changed hands or will the affiliation be Planet specific?-Volt 02:55, 29 February 2012 (PST)

I'm not sure I quite follow the question, but that also means I may not have written the entry in the template very clearly. I've pushed for the owner history section to be kept, as it's usually a series of useful data points, and because as we don't have detailed planet histories, I don't think it's appropriate to make sweeping statements like "Rollis remained a Capellan planet throughout the 3rd Succession War" within the planet history simply because we've only got the 3025 and 2864 maps and Rollis is in Capellan space in both. Owner History wasn't a popular term though, so Political Affiliation was a compromise - a record of who owned a planet at a given point in time or a range of years, based on the information available. So, I'd expect the owner History entries to move across, but also to see them expand somewhat based on entries in books where we know planets were fought over or changed hands, but not when precisely. Asuncion is a good example of that at the moment. Does that make any sense? BrokenMnemonic 03:23, 29 February 2012 (PST)

Hehe it's funny how you were able to answer my question without understanding it, but yes, the data you put on Asuncion is how I understood what you meant in your template. I was actually thinking of putting fixed years such as 2571, 2750, 2822, etc... then if there's a change of affiliation/ownership in between [for example, between 2571 and 2750] then the relevant date(or year) would be listed along with the fixed years.-Volt 04:47, 29 February 2012 (PST)

That's what Doneve and I have been doing for a while now - we started out with the maps, as the maps provide a lot of fixed data points across all the worlds thanks to the Handbooks, but a part of the idea with changing it from "Owner History" to "Political Affiliation" was to get away from the idea that it provided an exhaustive ownership record, and instead was more of a list of known dates and affiliations. Individual dates are all valuable, in my opinion But by keeping it as a list of specific dates only, you run the risk of changes not being catalogued. I think it's much better to have a date like Ca. 2351-2352 - disputed world (Sarna Supremacy/Chesterton Trade Federation) and a text entry in the planet history to show that the world changed hands at some point during the war rather than to try and pin it down to either 2351 or 2352 without evidence (which counts as making an assumption) or without noting the date at all. By keeping the owner history details in there, it also gives a handy list people can just run their eye over to see how the affiliation of the planet has changed over time. BrokenMnemonic 04:56, 29 February 2012 (PST)

Makes perfect sense. In a way that portion of your work aligns perfectly with the work Syntax and I have been doing. Gotta love collaboration, eh? -Volt 16:26, 29 February 2012 (PST)

Another question regarding "No Record", if we have confirmation that the system was uninhabited/undiscovered at a certain period, [such as the Pentagon prior to SLiE's landfall] do we also put it as "No Record"?-Volt 16:00, 7 March 2012 (PST)

Typos

There are a few small typos in this template, but it is a user page, and therefor forbidden grounds for my usual editing rampages. May I edit it? --DragonoftheRust (talk) 16:11, 19 October 2020 (EDT)