User talk:Mbear/archive2012


There has been a question about the -1G variant of the Annihilator. I don't have RS:Klondike, so would you mind checking on it? --Scaletail 05:31, 23 December 2011 (PST)

Doneve's answered the question.--Mbear(talk) 03:57, 19 January 2012 (PST)

Record Sheets 3050 Upgrades Unabridged[edit]

Hy Mbear, i see you removed the moratorium template, i want to stard adding BV (2.0) to all variants, i don't want to delete BV's there don't match the RS:3050Uu Clans & Star League entry, but i delete the RS:3050U references, i cant found on the old Record Sheets any BV, i give you an example on the Dasher page, i stard to do this yet, please give me a response when you found time, thanks.--Doneve 12:38, 18 January 2012 (PST)

I don't see anything wrong with what you've done.--Mbear(talk) 03:56, 19 January 2012 (PST)

Take a look[edit]

Hy again, please can you take a look on this interesting talk BattleTechWiki talk:Project Military Commands#force structure of the different factions, what you are think about this.--Doneve 13:28, 19 January 2012 (PST)

Rank Insignia[edit]

Hello Mbear, I upload the insignia because they are different from yours. It was mentioned in the Field Manual: Federated Suns p. 26 that the ranks insignia changed after the seperation from the Lyran Alliance. Furthermore a few ranks were reestablished or new created. My goal is to put at every military organization page a link to a site were the the rank structure is explained with the different between naval and army. Neuling 09:28, 1 February 2012 (PST)

I think I understand, but just to be sure I do I want to rephrase what you said this way:

My goal is to create a page similar to Armed Forces of the Federated Suns Military Ranks that will contain information regarding the roles and responsibilities of the army and naval ranks are clearly defined. For example the duties of an AFFS Leftenant Colonel/Light Commodore in 3025 are different from those of an AFFS Leftenant Colonel/Light Commodore in 3067. This page will show the difference in responsibilities.

At the same time, I also want to show how the FedCom Alliance affected the rank structures of the AFFS and the LCAF, as you don't provide any information about that.

Am I reading you correctly? If so, this is a good idea and one I wish I had thought of.--Mbear(talk)
You understand my intention about the project correctly. It will take some time to compare the different system and to find a way how I can explain the differents understandable.Neuling 05:39, 2 February 2012 (PST)

DCMS Deploment[edit]

Hello Mbear, please take a look at User:Neuling/DCMS Deployment and give me your response. The article is abut the deployment of DCMS forces. The next step are the expansion of

3050 - 20 Year Update
3054 - Objective Raids
3059 - Field Manual Draconis Combine
3062 - Shattered Sphere
3067 - Field Manual Updates
3079 - Field Report DCMS

when possible with maps in a gallery for comparision. tnx Neuling 13:31, 6 February 2012 (PST)

I would to say a lot of the content on the page merged with the DCMS Military District pages during the various eras, example Dieron Military District.--Doneve 14:16, 6 February 2012 (PST)
I agree with Doneve that a lot of this would look good on the relevant Military District page. I also like your idea of including a map of the relevant prefecture/district. You might put that in another column in your table.--Mbear(talk) 06:24, 7 February 2012 (PST)
I made some minor spelling and grammar changes to the page. Deletions are shown in strikethrough. Not bad really, just some basic errors that crept in and detract from the article.--Mbear(talk) 06:30, 7 February 2012 (PST)


Hello Mbear, I use a spell checker to improve the quality of my work. Please tell me if he works reliable. AFFS training & education Tnx Neuling 12:30, 8 February 2012 (PST)

The spell checker did a good job of finding all the misspelled words. It didn't find instances of the wrong word being used or some oddities with past vs. present tense, but that's understandable. For example under Military Academies Enrollment header:

The aspirant must pass a fare harder test then the usual enlisted.

Should be

The aspirant must pass a far harder test then the usual enlisted.

But overall using the spell checker has eliminated a lot of the small spelling errors that were previously in your work. Good job.--Mbear(talk) 06:05, 9 February 2012 (PST)

2011 Superior Editor of the Year Award[edit]

Congratulations on your win, man. I'm not at all surprised to see you with this. Your editorial skills have been consistent, fair and broad. I'm glad this went to you.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 19:34, 12 February 2012 (PST)

Thanks!--Mbear(talk) 03:47, 13 February 2012 (PST)

Modified Map[edit]

Hello Mbear, I created a map for the Kagoshima Prefecture with the DCMS deployment. Kagoshima-Prefecture-3054.png Please awnser my a few question: 1st What can be improved? 2nd Where can it be incoporated? 3rd Was it a good idea? 4th Shoud I carry on with the work about such maps? tnx Neuling 09:22, 13 February 2012 (PST)

1a. Right now I don't see a thumbnail when I click the image. I'm not sure what's going on there but it's something I'd look into if I were you.
1b. I've corrected the image template. You don't put anything on the Image Summary line, but the lines underneath it. (This is really important.)
2. I've put a link to the image in place on your test DCMS deployment page. I've basically added it to the second table in a new column. If we expand the prefectures into actual pages, putting it on that page as well seems logical.
3. I think so. You may also want to make a plain map that just shows the Prefecture worlds for general use. For example on the Prefecture page you've currently got redlinked. If we ever establish maps for the Successor States, this would be a good image for that as well.
4. I can't think of a reason not to carry on.
I hope that helps!--Mbear(talk) 09:58, 13 February 2012 (PST)


Hy Mbear please can you move the new xtro image to his right place or rename the file, thanks.--Doneve 08:03, 14 February 2012 (PST)

Done! You had the right filename, but the extension of the image you provided is JPEG, not JPG. XTRO Primitives, Volume 2.jpeg--Mbear(talk) 11:07, 14 February 2012 (PST)


Hello Mbear, I have a large project underway. I will bring all availble components to Furthermore I will update the manufacturer pages after the complete upload of all information to my sub pages. Please take a look (User:Neuling/TRO 3085 - Components) and give me your response. Tnx Neuling

That's a lot of work. I can't think of anything else to say.--Mbear(talk) 12:00, 14 February 2012 (PST)
And what do you thinking about it?Neuling 12:34, 14 February 2012 (PST)
I think it would be useful on the appropriate page (large laser, etc.).--Mbear(talk) 04:52, 15 February 2012 (PST)


Mbear - Awesome work on those updates. You've earned a Substantial Addition Award, 1st ribbon. ClanWolverine101 16:08, 2 March 2012 (PST)

Hey thanks!--Mbear(talk) 04:09, 3 March 2012 (PST)

Sidebar code[edit]

Afternoon, Mbear.

I'm messing around with a personal BT project wherein I want to include a sidebar (on a personal wiki). However, I was thinking that it could very well be useful here as well. Would you take a look at my personal sandbox, please? I'd like to close off the sidebar at the top & bottom and backshade it the same way your themes do.

Your expertise would be appreciated. Thanks.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 13:18, 18 April 2012 (PDT)

Thanks for grabbing my attention. I have some back-n-forth for you on my talk page. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 10:32, 22 April 2012 (PDT)


Hy Mbear, i created the 1st Syrtis Fusiliers article, the command is also added on the Syrtis Fusiliers brigade page, now is the question is this the right place? I think not, i favor to create a Capellan March Brigade article and put the 1st to it with the other new created commands like Syrtis Avengers an so on, iam right with this or not.--Doneve 11:09, 26 June 2012 (PDT)

I think the 1st Syrtis Fusiliers should be on the Syrtis Fusiliers brigade page. They're listed as part of that brigade.
As for the Syrtis Avengers, Field Report: AFFS says they were originally created as part of the Syrtis Fusiliers. I can therefore see putting the Avengers on the same brigade page as the Fusiliers. (After all, both the Fusiliers and Avengers are units created by the Hasek family that were later assigned as part of the AFFS. The Davion Brigade of Guards is the same thing, but with forces that were raised by the Davion family.)
Hope that helps!--Mbear(talk) 11:51, 26 June 2012 (PDT)
Apologies for jumping in uninvited, but Field Manual: 3085 seems to consider the Syrtis Avengers a part of the Fusiliers. The description on page 63 for the Avengers begins "Officially only two Syrtis Fusiliers regiments—the First and the Eighth—were authorized to take part in Operation MATADOR. Nathanial Hasek chose to bring the Avengers with him when he took command of the Pleiades front." BrokenMnemonic 12:43, 26 June 2012 (PDT)
No problem BM. Good to know there's more information.--Mbear(talk) 04:35, 27 June 2012 (PDT)

Manufacturing Timeline[edit]

Hy Mbear, i hope you can help me, i updated at this time the Manufacturing Timeline, i wan't to adding wikitables, and separate some units in the various year sections, like ['Mechs], [Combat Vehicles], [Battle Armors], [AeroSpace Fighters] etc., but i don't know how i can handle this, to highlite the sections and give the page a new clean style.--Doneve 13:46, 11 July 2012 (PDT)

So you do want to add tables to the page, correct?--Mbear(talk) 10:28, 12 July 2012 (PDT)
Yep this is correct, but i want to integrate all variants, configuratins etc.--Doneve 11:05, 12 July 2012 (PDT)
OK. Let me see what I can find out about Semantic Mediawiki. I think there are some tags/features/things I don't know yet that will do what you want.--Mbear(talk) 12:32, 12 July 2012 (PDT)
No problem, let me update the page with all variants, configurations and so on, (ca. 1000) are missed on the manufacturer page, i have a great soure from [Bad Syntax], he created a pdf with 1200 pages, the pdf include all existing units there exist in the BT Universe and he fix all errors that occured on the MUL site, if you have interest i give you this link [1] and you can take a look in it, and please give me a response, greetings.--Doneve 14:50, 12 July 2012 (PDT)
That's good to know, but this is more complicated than I thought. I'm sure it can be done, but I think it's going to require updates to some infoboxes to get the info you want. I'm also going to have to find a list of supported values and stuff. (This isn't something you have, so don't worry about it just yet.)--Mbear(talk) 13:14, 13 July 2012 (PDT)
Hy Mbear, i think Seth can help us, take a look on his talk page User talk:Seth.--Doneve 11:15, 26 July 2012 (PDT)

Era Report: 2750[edit]

Hy again, the moratorium for Era Report: 2750 has expired, can update the minor news, thanks.--Doneve 08:03, 12 July 2012 (PDT)

Done. I'm looking at the other request, but give me a little more time OK?--Mbear(talk) 10:21, 12 July 2012 (PDT)


I appreciate how you're tirelessly monitoring the moratorium periods for new products and updating the minor news section. I think this qualifies as Community Service: Community Service Award, 2nd ribbon

Also, thanks for deleting spambot pages: Vandal Cop Award, 1st ribbon
However, beyond blocking the user and deleting all edits I suggest you also eliminate the entire account. Go to "Special Pages" in the Toolbox section down on the left userbar, then select "Merge and delete". Merge the offending username into "Anonymous" (and check the delete box) to purge that user account for good. Frabby 01:55, 13 July 2012 (PDT)

Thanks for the awards. I'll start merging the spammers into oblivion!--Mbear(talk) 03:50, 13 July 2012 (PDT)

Hi Mbear,

All Purpose Award, 6th ribbon

I'd like to give you this all purpose award, in part because I can't see an award that an editor can give another editor for ambassadorial work; I find reading the BattleTech forum rather depressing at times, because the opinions expressed regarding Sarna seem to be generally negative - particularly from certain voluble sources - and yet whenever I see you comment in response, it's always in a good-natured and diplomatic way. I've only been here a year, but I've managed to put in 7,500 edits - enough to make me the 5th most prolific editor here, apparently. I came in from nowhere, and I don't know anything like as much as some of the more vocal critics over on the forum, but I keep drafting replies to these posts and then deleting them because I can't find a way to diplomatically say "how is it I can become the 5th most prolific editor in a year, and yet apparently contribute nothing of value in your opinion, and yet you, who evidently know so much more about the BattleTech universe than I do, and who apparently can spot all of these errors and mistakes looming large with every trip to Sarna, can't make the effort to make changes for the good of the wiki and those who use it?" I find it intensely frustrating that so many are prepared to criticise the wiki, while so few are willing to work on it, and yet in the face of that you retain your sense of good humour. I think that deserves an award, and the all purpose award is the most directly relevant one I could find... although don't think I wasn't tempted to go for the surreal humour one instead. BrokenMnemonic 01:00, 8 August 2012 (PDT)

Quite visibly, I have had problems with the BT forum user base (edit: only some users, but it got ugly and for that I am sorry, but enough was enough), but I consider it personal business that happened and is finished (Like the Wars of Reaving). I hear you about voluble sources, though, BrokenM. It's too bad people that know so much won't share what they know in a meaningful way - and it is then compounded when those same people cast negative aspersions at the work that has been done here.
I think Sarna's stock is on the rise, for what it is worth. At MWO and MechWarrior Tactics forums, the opinion is the opposite of the negative stuff that can be found at the BT forum. I have actually seen people say that they love Sarna for all the things they have learned. Several people agreed with that commenter, and no dissension was voiced. That made me very happy, as I look at that forum maybe once a week if I'm really bored. It also made me realize that I have taken the BT forum too seriously in the past. Much better to express things that are positive, and in positive ways. Like this at Sarna.
Anyway, that is my two units of devalued copper alloy. I dropped by this page, Frabby's and Scaletail's pages to make sure you guys have been awarded for deleting all that spam, and I see that has already been done. As well it should be. Great Work on that, and on making this site a 15k article monster that truly is valued by the community. --Rebs 19:05, 5 September 2012 (PDT)

Unknown Planets[edit]

Hi Mbear,

I noticed the initial page loads you've done for the "no record" and "unknown planet" owner history entries. The terms have caused Doneve and I a bit of a headache over the last year, as the two of us are the ones doing the bulk of the work on updating the planet affiliations from the various maps, and it's easy for people to get worked up over the idea that a planet shouldn't be recorded as an unknown planet unless we can prove the date on which it was discovered categorically. That's why Doneve and I have generally been using the term "no record" to indicate where the absence of proof isn't the same as proof of absence - the number of planets with entries marked "unknown planet" should steadily shrink as the two of us catch up with the various planet histories. We aren't using the two terms as synonyms, though - an unknown planet is one where we know when it's been discovered, and refers to maps that predate that discovery date; the "no record" entry simply signifies that it isn't recorded on maps at that point in history. New Dallas isn't an example of an unknown planet after the Star League era, but rather the term "no record" signifies that it drops off the maps. I did float the idea of listing some worlds as "dead world" - New Dallas, Alarion, etc, but Frabby didn't like the idea because in most cases the fact that a planet dropped off the map in the succession wars, even with Oystein saying that successor state planets that vanish are essentially dead, doesn't actually categorically mean that it's dead unless something somewhere states specifically that it is.

Who'd have thought that planetary histories would be such a busy subject? Wink.gif BrokenMnemonic 11:54, 11 August 2012 (PDT)

I saw the articles (No record and Unknown Planet), and in both cases I think they make for awkward articles. As placeholders, they are really an administrative issue, and should not be articles in the wiki's mainspace. My suggestion would be to create either a top-level paragraph or a sub-page named "Unknown Planet or No record" (or one for each, but I think they should be kept together) in a suitable BattleTechWiki domain, and create redirects in their place (for example, #REDIRECT[[BattleTechWiki:Project Planets/Unknown Planet or No record]] for an explanatory text like the one above or the ones currently constituting the articles. Possible places that "feel right" to redirect to:
  • BattleTechWiki:Project Planets sub-page(s) or paragraph
  • BattleTechWiki:Placeholders sub-page(s) or paragraph
  • Essays:Unknown or unrecorded planets
Frabby 13:58, 11 August 2012 (PDT)

You've both made good points. I've made the Unknown Planet and No Record pages redirect to BattleTechWiki:Project Planets/Unknown Planet or No record, per Frabby's suggestion, and included the definitions BrokenMnemonic provided above. Hopefully that will meet everyone's criteria. (Basically I was tired of seeing the two appearing in the WantedPages list. Sorry about the confusion.)--Mbear(talk) 05:06, 13 August 2012 (PDT)

Fanon Images[edit]

Mbear - Why the fanon images? Just had to ask. ClanWolverine101 10:41, 17 August 2012 (PDT)

Mostly to save Dirk Bastion a lot of work. :) He's categorizing them, and since the images of rank insignia are mostly mine, I didn't think it fair to dump all that on him.--Mbear(talk) 05:02, 20 August 2012 (PDT)

Thank you so much for your help! Dirk Bastion 10:57, 17 August 2012 (PDT)

4th Nova Cat Guards[edit]

Hy Mbear, can you take a look on the 4th Nova Cat Guards (Clan Nova Cat) page, i added some references and revamp the 3055 composition history for a futer page, i added some red links to the characters, there include all minor Nova Cat warriors etc. i think it looks ok to me, what do you think.--Doneve 10:15, 24 September 2012 (PDT)

Doneve, I don't have any problem with what you've done here. I don't know how useful the redlinks for the minor characters will be, but that's just because I don't think they're notable. Other than that, I don't see anything wrong with the page.--Mbear(talk) 10:35, 24 September 2012 (PDT)


Mbear - Is there any way for someone like myself to delete all of these spam "user" accounts or is that an administrator only privilege? Figured I could contribute more be deleting bad accounts. Thanks! CungrVanck 12:11, 24 September 2012 (PDT)

At the moment deleting accounts has to be done by an administrator. You can however put the spambot addresses on the Admin Talk page and we'll all see them there.--Mbear(talk) 03:59, 25 September 2012 (PDT)
Mbear, do you use the "Merge & Delete" function with Anoymous and with "Delete old account" checked? Because the spambots you blocked/deleted still shot up on the user registration list. Frabby (talk) 07:10, 5 October 2012 (PDT)
Yes, I did. Block them first, then merge them to Anonymous.--Mbear(talk) 08:22, 5 October 2012 (PDT)

Blocking the Chinese IPs apparently solved the problem, mostly at least. Thanks for your recent help with cleaning house! Vandal Cop Award, 2nd ribbon Frabby (talk) 02:13, 23 October 2012 (PDT)

Template expansion[edit]

Hy Mbear, i update a litte bit the Clan Commands, my question, is it usefull to add to the clan commands infobox a [Stationed on] entry, i think it was ok, but it was a idea, when you or others think yes, please can you update the infobox, with regards.--Doneve 07:22, 27 September 2012 (PDT)

I don't think so. It would change so frequently that it would be really tough to maintain. Typically that information is in the history of the unit anyway.--Mbear(talk) 07:53, 27 September 2012 (PDT)
Ok, you are right.--Doneve 07:54, 27 September 2012 (PDT)

BattleCorps Ship Profiles[edit]

Hiya, saw your edits to the ship profiles re: capitalisations. I was going to revert it, but thought perhaps we should have a discussion first because I can totally see where you're coming from. Please drop in at Talk:BattleCorps Ship Profiles Frabby (talk) 14:05, 4 October 2012 (PDT)

Responded on that page.--Mbear(talk) 05:19, 5 October 2012 (PDT)

Additional informations[edit]

Hello Mbear, perhaps I can help you with some information about two units from the FedCom civil war.

  • The 143rd ComStar Division fought against the 4th Alliance Guards in a series of skirmishes. The CO of the ComGuards units follow the orders of the LAAF to give up. The fighting strength of the Division was saved and the Alliance Guards withdraw. (Ref. Field Manual Updates p.87 9th army entry)
  • The Second Wolf Legion fought during the FedCom civil war against the Jade Falcon. (Ref. Field Manual Updates p.69)

with best regards Neuling (talk) 10:48, 12 October 2012 (PDT)

Thanks Neuling! I'll look through the FedCom Civil War Sourcebook when I get home to see if I can cross reference that information with these units.--Mbear(talk) 11:06, 12 October 2012 (PDT)

Conflict Box Talk[edit]

Mbear - Doneve said you might want to weigh in on this: Template talk:InfoBoxConflict ClanWolverine101 (talk) 05:38, 30 October 2012 (PDT)

Update Needed tag[edit]

Hy Mbear, i added the missing content to Objectives: Free Worlds League, but i would to say, i don't add the update needed template to the planet and manufacturing pages, i do this when the counter is under 1000 pages.--Doneve (talk) 10:19, 21 November 2012 (PST)

Thanks! I had a goal of trying to get the counter below 1000 by January 1, but I'm not sure it'll happen.--Mbear(talk) 10:23, 21 November 2012 (PST)
I'm not sure I believe this, given that you and I have spent all week tackling the update needed tags on articles... but the count for sources needing updates is 30 higher than it was last Sunday. That's not fair. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 13:11, 7 December 2012 (PST)
Agreed. On the upside, most of the new things added to the list appear to be units in Record Sheets 3067, so making the updates shouldn't be a huge deal. But it is disheartening at times.--Mbear(talk) 15:58, 7 December 2012 (PST)

Unit Logos[edit]

Hi Mbear,

Doneve and I have reworked the unit logo gallery to change it from one big bucket of 900 logos to a series of subcategories, broken down in a fashion similar to the unit classifications. There are a lot of unit logos that don't appear to have ever had the Unit Logo Gallery category added to them, so they're still floating around, rogue and uncategorized. As the wiki's most enthusiastic unit updater, could I ask you to take a quick look at the logos of units you update, and add the category if it's missing? I can go through the Unit Logo Gallery category periodically and re-sort them. I'd go and hunt them down myself, but after recategorizing the better part of 800 images in 3 days, I find my enthusiasm needs a litlte while to recharge! Ta very much. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:05, 1 December 2012 (PST)

I'll try to remember to do this, but I make no promises. (And I understand the need to recharge all too well!)--Mbear(talk) 06:25, 3 December 2012 (PST)

XTRO: Phantoms[edit]

Hy Mbear, the moratorium for XTRO: Phantoms has also expired.--Doneve (talk) 07:53, 17 December 2012 (PST)


Hy Mbear, have your All Purpose Award, 7th ribbon award, for your reduction of the update needed tags, i hope it becomes not a never ending story Wink.gif, great job.--Doneve (talk) 11:18, 19 December 2012 (PST)

Thanks!--Mbear(talk) 11:19, 19 December 2012 (PST)

Problems with Cruise Missile 120 article[edit]

Hello Mbear. There been comment on the article on Battletech forums. I think article may need better references notes. Someone who didn't own the Tac Ops, got confused way ref appeared on the page. the fluff you wrote was using references about weapons's development which i could not find a source for which added more confusion. I've made notes on your ref so newbies won't get fused what those citations (BV, Range etc) are referring to. However, can you find got the fluff on Fed Suns' development of the Cruise Missile from? We need cite it for the articles and likely the other sister cruise missile articles. -- Wrangler (talk) 11:42, 28 December 2012 (PST)

yeah, i can't remember where I saw it now, but I thought a world was 300 mapsheets in diameter. With that in mind I wrote that fluff. I've since changed it to reflect the reality that I don't remember where I saw it and I don't want to confuse newcomers. I also sent a note to Fyrwulf and CC'd you and Frabby on it explaining the situation. Hopefully the new text will fix the issue.--Mbear(talk) 05:42, 31 December 2012 (PST)