User talk:Mbear

Something you want to say? Just let me know!

User_talk:Mbear/archived

Tnx

First for your support. Second that you hear my opinion and to respect my work (you adopeted my layout chances from Davion Guards :) ) Thir your cooperation in the past and (I hope) in the future.

Have you ideas for me what can I do next. My to do list shortened extremly because my slowy work... Every day a sentence, in one week a word and in one month a letter. Neuling 12:51, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

What do do next?

• There are a lot of empty entries in the AFFS unit infoboxes (Nickname, Year formed, etc.) that could be filled.
• The units also need information in the History section.
• The 33rd and 34th Avalon Hussars pages need insignia.

Does this give you some ideas? If you don't want to do these tasks, you can always look at the wiki's "To Do" list for something.--Mbear 13:07, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

AFFS Commands

Love your work on breaking these up on the main article - I am hoping this becomes the new template on all the Successor State military commands. Have a . Good work and good effort.
- ClanWolverine101 14:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!--Mbear 14:33, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Inner Sphere military structure

Hi Mbear, i noticed great job your doing with military structures for the Inner Sphere. There is a missing formation your article is does not include. Army size formation, ComGuard (Level V) and old Star League use that size forces in their make up. Your article does mention it. -- Wrangler 12:01, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Added Corps and Army to the page. Thanks!--Mbear 12:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

WOW

Hy Mber congratulation for your new Admin status, i hope your work hold this level, but it is better when you push it up to a higher higher higher .Greetings--Doneve 13:02, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!--Mbear 13:05, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Congrats ;-) --Dmon 13:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations for your promotion and "burden" on your shoulder. I have an idea. Is it useful when I added informationen in the parent articles about the destruction of a unit with time (year) and planet. And I thought about it to expanded the seperation of the articles to all militias (clan => single galaxies, comstar => armies, periphery states => corps + brigades) Neuling 13:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Wait, what? He's an Admin? I didn't see this news release! Someone's slacking.--Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 14:45, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Cut me a little slack. It's my first day.--Mbear 14:50, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

...and you defend showing up late? And have no coffee skills?--Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 15:18, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Wait a second. I have to write my own announcement that I've been made an admin? Sheesh. Next you'll want me to pay for my own celebratory beer too! ;)--Mbear 19:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

"...to pay for my own celebratory beer too!" It's worse than you think: you have to pay for our's too. In the Navy, we call it a wetting down. The key is: the amount of a month's pay increase is what you spend on the party. Do the math. --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:16, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to pop in late, way to go! -- Wrangler 22:52, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Neuling's Idea

Is it useful when I added informationen in the parent articles about the destruction of a unit with time (year) and planet. And I thought about it to expanded the seperation of the articles to all militias (clan => single galaxies, comstar => armies, periphery states => corps + brigades) Neuling 13:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Neuling, please add any information you find useful. If you want to know when (year) and where (planet) a unit was destroyed, someone else probably does as well. The only possible problem is when you have units that were destroyed, rebuilt, and destroyed again (like the Lyran Regulars). In that case, you may want to put the detailed information about unit destruction in the unit's individual article.

As to the second part of your question (Expanding clan listings to single galaxies, comstar to armies, etc.), if you want to do so, go right ahead. Again, I'm sure someone will find the information useful. However, you may want to consider adding more detailed info to each unit rather than just creating the page. The list of units is useful, and the brief overview is as well, but having some more depth in the article is best. (For an example of what I'm trying to say, compare the 2nd Donegal Guards and 3rd Donegal Guards articles. Both have the basic info, but the 2nd DG page has a lot more information.)

But just doing the expansions you mentioned would be good.--Mbear 13:43, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I put this forward about a year ago and got a no based on the fact that units can be re-raised multiple times. --Dmon 15:02, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Dmon, can you provide a link to that discussion? I'm unsure of how Mbear's answer is invalidated by a unit's multiple destruction & re-creation, unless they were all being tracked on the parent unit's page. What others said would be useful to me.--Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 15:23, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I should of been more clear in that I was answering the first part of the idea about unit destruction dates. I have no idea where the discussion might be sadly. Re-reading the question.. to be honest I should just go back to sleep.. I thought he was asking something else anyway :-( --Dmon 15:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's good news in my book!--Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 16:02, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Lmao, I assume you mean it is good that I am saying the idea has already been discussed rather than me making an ass of myself yet again ;-) --Dmon 16:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

One means less 'work' and one amuses me. Win-win (for me)!--Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 16:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Citing BV & template

Policy_Talk:Canon#Citing_BV: looks like your idea has sparked support. Can you pls respond? --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 18:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Hy Mbear i post a little link *Master Unit List.pdf, i hope it is helpfull.--Doneve 20:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Creative Commons Share Alike license

Hi Mbear,

I noticed that you added the Creative Commons Share Alike v3.0 license to many of the images you've uploaded. I'm not sure whether that's the appropriate license. If you have simply redrawn an image without significantly modifying it, the image does not qualify as a "derivative work" and you must instead claim and justify fair use. Am I misunderstanding what you're doing? Thanks for the clarification. --Ebakunin ^{(talk|contribs)} 14:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

You're not misunderstanding me. I put the CCSA on there so others could use my work. But in light of what you just said, I'll pull the CCSA off teh images.--Mbear 15:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm really sorry to rain on your parade like that. You must've put an awful lot of effort into the work. However, whenever possible we encourage using the original image as it is a better way to claim fair use. A user-modified version of a copyrighted image makes it much more complicated to establish ownership. Again, I'm sorry about this whole mess. --Ebakunin ^{(talk|contribs)} 15:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I have an umbrella.--Mbear 15:23, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Territory Clan Wars

I read the Field Manuals Warden + Crusader clans again + the fm upadtes and wonder that their a lot of changes and feuds between each clans. My project for the weekend is to put this on a special site. Can you give me ideas for an layout? I can write about every planet with defenders and attackers or every clan with attacks and defense operation. And i don't know if the possession wars were from 3060 - 3067 or shorter give my a backup please. Neuling 17:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

"And i don't know if the possession wars were from 3060 - 3067 or shorter give my a backup please." I'm not sure what the Possession Wars are, but if I remember correctly the time period is basically during the Truce of Tukayyid. So there wasn't a lot of Clan adventurism except for the Coventry invasion. The fighting you're talking about took place in the Clan homeworlds, right?

For the organization/layout of these you may want to look at the Operation: Ice Storm page. It looks like you've done some work on it so you're already familiar with the page structure. It provides a quick overview of each clan involved (and what galaxies were used), then moves on to describe the individual conflicts by time period.

What I might do if I was writing this article is start by organizing the info by Clan, then by time. So you might see:

---

Factions involved

This was a time of great upset for the homeworld clans. Since they weren't a part of the Inner Sphere invasion they had to sit at home and knit booties for their cadets.

Clan Fluffy Bunny

Alpha Galaxy - On date attacked other clan force on planetname. The Fluffy Bunny Unit defeated other clan force, but lost three trinaries/clusters in the process.

Clan Pursuing Greyhound

Beta Galaxy - On date won Trial of Possession with Other Clan for Something Totally Awesome.

Inter-Clan Conflicts during Truce of Tukayyid

3052

Clan Fluffy Bunny sent their Alpha Galaxy to PillowFactoryPlanet to take control of their long lost PillowFactory. The Clan Swimming Monkey force guarding the factory was defeated by the Fluffy Bunnies, but the Bunnies lost two trinaries of the 7th Snow Hare Cluster in the process. The Bunnies took seven bondsmen from the Swimming Monkeys during the trial, which brought the 7th Snow Hare Cluster back up to strength.

Clan Giant Dwarf staged a Trial of Refusal against Clan Micro Dinosaur for the Dwarf's famed cake recipe. The Dwarves were not successful, and soon the Micro Dinosaur Merchant Caste flooded the Homeworld markets with these tasty pastries, driving the Dwarf economy underground.

3053

Something happened.

Something else happened.

3065

Something happened.

Something else happened.

The Big Something that Happened in 3065

The Harvest Trials took place during this time. These trials allowed the Crusader clans to rebuild their forces quickly by capturing bondsmen, beans, and toothpaste from other clans.

---

Notice how the years get more detailed information about each event while the Clan-level stuff is just an quick overview. I don't know if that will help you or not, but I hope so. --Mbear 20:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm a little confused. In FM Crusader clans stood that the trials were held by Wolf and JAde Falcon during 3059 or was later did this kind or trial again... Neuling 19:54, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I think the original Harvest Trials were held as you mention above. The example I provided was just that: An example. I needed something to fill the space. I'm sure there were other conflicts where one clan took another's forces in Trials of Possession.--Mbear 15:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

This is what I was thinking of! I knew the Jade Falcons and Vlad's Wolves used the Harvest Trials extensively after the Refusal War to rebuild. Vlad and Marthe Pryde were talking about it in Grave Covenant, and the Ice Hellion Khan was pissy because of how many people he lost. ClanWolverine101 15:36, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Shadow Division Infobox update

Hi MBear, there no information on actual Shadow Division command. Thats why i was putting in Manei Domino for the as to whom the Shadow Divisions answer too, which is Precentor Apollyon. Since he Precentor Shadow Division, thus why i put Manei Domini instead of a non-existing Shadow Division High Command. I thought be odd putting Precetor Apollyon in as the Parent command. -- Wrangler 18:33, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I know there's no listing for the Shadow Division as a whole, but I just put the finishing touches on it. It will hold information that affects all the Shadow Divisions, like their relationship to The Master, the infighting between St. Jamais & Apollyon, their equipment, and eventual destruction. Sort of like the Davion Brigade of Guards page. Also see the Word of Blake Protectorate for some info.--Mbear 18:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Only thing is see as slight problem is duplication. Manei Domini IS the Shadow Divisions, there on in the same. I created the Manei Domini Article to hold the events and goings of Manei which included the Divisions. I can understand having the Division organized, having history entire Brigade, i think should be included with Manei Domini article. A section dedicated to the Division as a whole. Hopefully, future source books when they come out, will clear up what command structure is actually called. From everything I read, it points high command is Manei Domini, since they don't listen to Word of Blake High Command, which they apparenty do have, but nothing in detail. -- Wrangler 19:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I see your point, particularly about duplication, but respectfully disagree with your conclusion. The Manei Domini article you've written is a great description of the individual soldiers who serve in the Shadow Divisions and the cybernetic equipment they use. The Shadow Division article covers the combat units the Manei Domini belonged to rather than the individual soldiers themselves. I'm trying to make it a bridge between your MD article and the individual shadow division pages.--Mbear 19:52, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Manei Domini Article Questions

Hi Mbear, I have question regarding the tables i had put in there. I worked hard get that right and felt it made article look less amaturstic and easier to read. Why did you remove them for the vehicles/mechs/battlarmor? -- Wrangler 11:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I replaced the tables with lists because I thought they were easier to read. I'll be happy to change them back if they bother you.--Mbear 11:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Image summary

Hi Mbear,

Would you please take another stab at the {{image summary}} sourcing. Try to make it look more like this. I'm going to rewrite the template explanation now to hopefully make it easier to use. Thanks a lot! --Ebakunin ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)