User talk:Revanche

Revision as of 12:34, 5 June 2021 by Revanche (talk | contribs) (→‎Current: -2016)

Archives

Current

Please add new entries to the bottom of this page (in order to ensure I actually see them).

Award

I also spotted that you hit the 8000 edit mark and I can't believe you don't already have this award so I'm presenting it to you now Casual Edit Award, 1st ribbon Long overdue I think! - Dark Jaguar (talk) 04:57, 13 June 2017 (EDT)

LOL! You're awesome. Thanks so much, DJ. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 21:13, 13 June 2017 (EDT)

Edits

Hi Rev - I just wanted to say it's really nice to see your name cropping up in the recent edits again. Makes the wiki feel more like home again! Hope you're keeping well. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 07:51, 29 July 2017 (EDT)

Thanks, man. I'm using BTW to distract myself from my thesis research/writing. So far, it's working perfectly. ;) --Revanche (talk|contribs) 09:03, 29 July 2017 (EDT)

How are you doing?

Hi Rev, I got your PM via my email address but I could not enter the CBT forums to reply, 504 error apparently. I am well, thank you for asking. I have not updated the coordinates list since the release of the Touring the Stars books as I've focused on RL stuff and have not made any new BT-related book purchase since McEvedy's Folly I think. As such I don't know if there are any new maps released or historical data on worlds that are usually written in the Touring the Stars books. I don't know if I'll be coming back to CBT anytime soon to update the cartography data because I don't have new reference documents to work with.-Volt

Volt, can we talk via email? If so, click on 'Email this user' in the sidebar (when you're on my page). --Revanche (talk|contribs) 20:15, 29 July 2017 (EDT)
I can't seem to find the 'Email this User' link so I made a burner email address instead. You can email me initially at volt.kva@gmail.com, sorry for the hassle -Volt
Got it; maybe we can chat there. OTW. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 20:37, 29 July 2017 (EDT)

Astronomical Features

Hi Rev, I appreciate what you're doing with Category:Astronomical Features vs. Category:Planets (which should really be Category:Systems!). However, there are two distinct instances I'd like to raise with you:

  • Cygnus X-1 is not an astronomical feature, it is quite clearly a binary star system (blue supergiant & black hole) and thus belongs into the planets/systems category, not the Astronomical Features category imho.
  • The Dark Nebula, Erit Cluster and Camelot Command are one big mess:
    • I agree with you that the Dark Nebula is an AF, not a system or planet; however, in fiction it is unfortunately oftentimes treated as the system where Camelot Command is located. The most prominent example I can think of is Operation ICE STORM (novel) part 2, where the epigraph of the climax chapters is captioned as "Fredasa-class WarShip Whelp, Dark Nebula" (at the jump point of the system containing Camelot Command) and later "Camelot Command Ops Center, Dark Nebula, Clan Ice Hellion Occupation Zone". This, to me, suggests that "Dark Nebula" may arguably refer to not only to the nebula, but also to the specific system therein with Camelot Command in it.
    • The Erit Cluster was determined to be a cluster within the Dark Nebula by means of exclusion - it is the only possible location, but this was never explicitly confirmed. The question is, how do we treat clusters - should they be "super-systems" with a defined middle point (c.f. Flannagan's Nebula which is the poster child for essentially one really big multi-star system) or should be track individual sun systems within such connected systems? What about regular clusters that are just a bunch of individual but very close star systems?
    • Finally, Camelot Command. Technically, it's a SLDF ship maintenance yard. The term can, however, also be applied to the hollowed-out asteroid that encompasses the facility, and then via established canonical BattleTech terminology it could even be applied to the entire system it is in (which is otherwise unnamed, even explicitly described as "unnamed" in some canonical source I can't find right now, and as mentioned above apparently also wrongly referred to as Dark Nebula).

I'm travelling with little if any internet access for the upcoming week, so I'll leave you guys with that to ponder for now. :) Frabby (talk) 06:18, 12 August 2017 (EDT)

  • Cygnus X-1: you're right; I focused in on the black hole, disregarding the star. I'll fix that now.
  • Dark Nebula: I'll wait to make any changes/revisions until consensus is reached, but I think this can be resolved with a note and disambiguations. One page will refer to the typical stub article about the nebula, while the other will re-direct to Camelot Command (with the appropriate note indicating why). In fact, I'd use those exact examples as citations (page numbers would be helpful).
  • Erit Cluster: my issue with the use of the word 'cluster' is the real-world scientific definition: clusters are noted for having hundreds of stars (open), and upwards of thousands or more (globular). What TPTB describe here is a system with (from the article): "at least seventeen pulsars and numerous red and white dwarf stars". My first instinct is that we're talking about an extremely small cluster, as a mis-use of the term; however, in hindsight, that's probably on me: there's nothing indicating there couldn't be well over 100 total stars. In that case, it's definitely not a "super-system" as all of the hundred+ stars would not be orbiting a singular barycenter. So, from that conclusion, I'd argue the Erit Cluster is indeed intended to be an actual cluster (probably an open one) and that Drovahchein II should be broken out as a system article. (Will await consensus, before being bold.)
  • Flannagan's Nebula: wasn't there a productive discussion some where about this? As I seem to recall reading, a good argument was made that the depicted systems were most accurately thought of as an embedded graphic of a multiple-star system within the nebula. In lieu of a definitive statement by TPTB, I think a noted decision on the relevant articles (Flannagan's Nebula, Jamestown, Ishtar, and Samantha) should be added. (Really wish I could find that discussion; I liked how it defined the coordinates as the only likely means to jump into the overall system and then use thrust to reach the individual planets.) (Will await consensus, before being bold.)
  • Camelot Command: as above (Dark Nebula). The article should be named 'Camelot Command', referencing the system and the primary inhabited body (be it an asteroid or asteroid-covered maintenance yard). It's not a bad idea for us to make a decision in lieu of an official determination, as long as we note it as such. In fact, doing so may invoke Cunningham's Law, which would be a good thing. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 09:21, 12 August 2017 (EDT)
Looks like I worded my comments poorly (tends to happen when I'm in a rush - sorry). To elaborate, we're not told just how many systems the Erit Cluster encompasses; but no such cluster nor any of the named systems therein (Drovachein II, Drune?) is mentioned anywhere on any map, which leaves only the Dark Nebula as its possible location. The conclusion is that the Erit cluster is within, and/or a part of, the "largely unexplored" Dark Nebula - probably the explored part of it. And it is the Dark Nebula that was described as including "at least 17 pulsars and numerous red and white dwarfs", not the Erit cluster. About Flannagan's Nebula, its nature was discussed on the HBS forum. A search should get you to the thread. Frabby (talk) 09:32, 12 August 2017 (EDT)
PS Very glad to have you back as an active editor. I can already see how you're making me work harder on Sarna! ;) Frabby (talk) 09:32, 12 August 2017 (EDT)
Aaah, I see now. The ambiguity of the cluster's location also leaves you in doubt regarding the make-up of the nebula (in which it could be located). To be fair, I think your conclusions are good: with no evidence to counter, it does appear the only location for the cluster is within the nebula, and I don't see why the "at least 17 pulsars and numerous red and white dwarfs" cannot also describe the make-up of the cluster (if it is co-located). There's nothing mutually exclusive stated. I like it, and I want to say, "Until indicated otherwise, Sarna's perspective is the cluster resides within the nebula". Any issue with me making article changes to support that now?
I'll look on HBS; thank you. I think I'll import that discussion to Flannagan's Nebula, so we can make a decision. And as for being back: Sarna is a great way to avoid my thesis work. Challenging you: while I enjoy the collaboration, I don't intend to make it challenging. If it results in a better process, ok then, but apologies otherwise, mate. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 09:57, 12 August 2017 (EDT)
Regarding Camelot Command, I've been careful to use the phrase "planet or habitable construct" in the planets articles, as we can't be certain in a lot of cases if they were actual planets, or domed communities (Sirius), stations (Gulf Breeze) or even just notable fixed spacecraft (Rest Stop). I'd say that on that basis, Camelot Command should have its own article, like a planet. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 14:47, 12 August 2017 (EDT)

Legacy Anthology

Hi Rev, I rolled back your rollback of the IP edit to the Legacy anthology - because that was editor Phil Lee himself, who had also emailed me about it, pointing out that the summary of the last story's (epilogue's) contents was against our own Policy:Moratorium and also a bit of a spoiler. I therefore suggest to leave the summaries out of the article, at least until I go back after the moratorium period and provide summaries for all stories therein. Frabby (talk) 08:53, 20 September 2017 (EDT)

Gotcha. Thanks, Frabby. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 15:12, 20 September 2017 (EDT)

Thanks for the welcome

I already have a wiki or two to handle, just thought I'd do a little cleanup where I saw a few issues. :-) 86.182.39.216 23:24, 6 May 2018 (EDT)

We're certainly eager to make use of your wiki experience.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 08:40, 7 May 2018 (EDT)

Spambot War Effort

I have been tagging spambot pages with the deletion tag, Is this helping the war effort or is there something else i should be doing when i see these pages pop up? I do not want to leave them be as many of them have some shady links Straw Boss (talk) 09:38, 19 May 2018 (EDT)

Overall, it's helpful. It reminds us admins that Editors do care about this. It does require an extra step when you tag them...but I don't care, because it proves to me that these attacks are bothering everyone. So thanks for that. By the way, the analysis I've been doing on the ones you tagged yesterday and today are working; the abuse log shows about 50% are not going thru. I was also planning on awarding you a Vandal Cop ribbon when I came to a suitable stopping point. So, thank you for the good fight. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 09:48, 19 May 2018 (EDT)

Character infobox

Morning Rev, I suspect it was not intentional but the Birth date stat does not seem to populate on the revised Character Infobox. I would have a look myself but I don't actually know the code (House box was pure trial and error).--Dmon (talk) 04:05, 14 June 2018 (EDT)

The parameter was "birthdate" originally, but Rev shortened it to "Born" which is why the InfoBox doesn't recognize and display it. I've just been called away from my desk but will fix this later today. (Though I'm not sure why we needed that change in the first place. Granted, we don't know the dates in most cases, but it's such an important thing about people that I never considered not making it a fixed entry when I created the InfoBox.) Frabby (talk) 04:43, 14 June 2018 (EDT)
Update: Fixed. The template is working again. I've considered leaving the template as-is and changing the articles instead - Rev's approach was way more elegant. But there's now many hundreds of articles out there using the InfoBox. Even if only a fraction of those has the "birthdate" field filled out, they would all have to be corrected so that the outdated parameter doesn't linger; and even just sifting through them all to find those actually using the field would be a chore and not worth the effort, imho. Frabby (talk) 07:34, 14 June 2018 (EDT)
Wow...apologies. I'm not sure how I made that mistake (changing "birthdate" to "born"). Glad you were able to suss it out. And apologies for not testing it better. I just wanted it to disappear when it wasn't in use, and didn't check beyond that.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 10:06, 14 June 2018 (EDT)

History of Clan Sea Fox

Greetings,

I wanted to let you know that I had intentions on merging the Clan Diamond Shark and Clan Sea Fox pages together. However before I could, I made a buffer article called History_of_Clan_Sea_Fox to add information of both Clan Sea Fox and Clan Diamond Shark. As such, I am leaving the two articles alone so I can add their information to the buffer article. The reason I wanted to do this was to show both the Diamond Sharks and the Sea Fox's history together in one article since they are both the same clan in a similar manner to the Lyran Commonwealth and the Lyran Alliance. For example, we both know that they are still House Steiner, but underwent a name change and switched back. So to go with the article, I made a slight change to the Clan Diamond Shark Touman changing them to "Former Galaxies" and explaining their changes from Clusters and Galaxies to Aimags and Khanates. As for the Clan Sea Fox Touman, I went ahead and added the Khanate and Aimags. With that said, do I have you support for the buffer article to later merge?

Oooh, wow...I'm glad you asked the question, Will, and I do agree with your logic.
However, I am about to hit the road for a few weeks AND I'm really not a strong Clan editor. I'd like to bring others into this. Before you go far down the road, I'm going to ask Frabby to weigh in and maybe start a consensus discussion.
Frabby will contact you on your page, to get your attention. Again, thanks for asking.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 22:30, 2 July 2018 (EDT)

Medal Ribbons

Hi Rev,

I've been having some trouble concentrating lately because of work, so I decided to sit down and start slogging through some of the site admin stuff that hangs around. I've been going through and adding categories to articles and files that need them, and as part of that, I've created a gallery for all of the award ribbons to go in. As you're the artist making them, I thought I should let you know - hope I've not overstepped. At the moment, I'm sorting them all into a single category, Category: Sarna Award, but it would be easy to sort them into subcategories for the various ribbons - although where ribbons don't stack (such as the Founder special awards) I'd suggest using a misc or one-off category tag. I'm designating those versions of the standard awards with a founders tag as number 11 in each series, for consistency. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 05:18, 12 October 2018 (EDT)

As Luke Cage (and Pops) says, "Always forward." I have no issues and appreciate the effort to improve it. Thank you.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 09:18, 12 October 2018 (EDT)
Hi Rev,
I was churning through the files without categories list, and I hit the edit count ribbons, and I think I've screwed up somewhere. I've got a ribbon on my awards board for reaching 30,000 edits, but the gallery doesn't have one at that level - did I mess something up at some point? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 18:20, 17 October 2018 (EDT)
No, you didn't miss anything. Whatever my templates were originally, I remember I was limited in how to create ribbons to something that would not count every 5 or 10k mark. So, to encourage new users, I made the first ones easy to earn, but jumped from 10k straight to 25k, and then every 25k thereafter to 100k. We may have to limit them to every 100k after that point....unless we can come up with method that has a better display of iterations.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 14:32, 21 October 2018 (EDT)
OK, so I should drop back down from the old 30k ribbon to the new 25k ribbon, as the old 30k ribbon is (I think) now the new 50k ribbon? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 16:20, 21 October 2018 (EDT)
Dude, I apologize. I understand your question better now (I thought this was about your gallery work), but, yes, the 30K was retired. Again, I apologize.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 09:11, 22 October 2018 (EDT)

Planets Coordinates

Fan-created art

Hi Rev, I was a bit nonplussed by your statements on over at User talk:Pserratv#Arms of Thor Logo, and put an answer there. Frabby (talk) 04:32, 5 February 2019 (EST)

HussarZwei self-nomination

I was wondering if I would qualify for another Community Service Award given my work on the Uncategorized files. I have created the following image categories:

-HussarZwei (talk) 01:24, 10 February 2019 (EST)

Good afternoon, HussarZwei. I have no issue with self-promotion, if you're not otherwise being recognized for your efforts. Let me go thru your history of edits in regards to these categories, and I'll let you know.However, consider adding this ribbon to your awards board. Your own contributions history will help you stay up on what you've earned.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 12:56, 10 February 2019 (EST)
Fair enough and best reguards. -HussarZwei (talk) 19:44, 10 February 2019 (EST)

Signature

Hey Rev, mostly asking because you are active right now.

Has your Signature vanished from the edit box at all today?--Dmon (talk) 13:45, 16 February 2019 (EST)

It has! Though it's present at this moment. If there is one thing to not load, it's that one box. But this extends to many MediaWiki wikis. I just don't know what cause it.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 13:57, 16 February 2019 (EST)
Last time mine started doing it was ironically enough about this time last year where a Mediawiki update did all kinds of weird things, I will keep an eye out and just hope it does not cascade.--Dmon (talk) 14:02, 16 February 2019 (EST)

WikiProject Award

Hi Rev,

Is the WikiProject Award one that can be implemented retrospectively? The reason I ask is that while Doneve was active here, we hit some big milestones on the Planets Project, like getting the affiliation categories added to all the systems, and adding co-ordinates to everything, and then updating all of the co-ordinates (at least once) and it would be nice to be able to backdate an award so that Doneve could have one on his user page, to commemorate the effort he put in on the project during the earlier stages. We're more than halfway through the project milestones now, even if it has taken years. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 14:17, 22 February 2019 (EST)

I see no reason why not, BM. I say there is just as much work ahead of us determining what Doneve didn't earn than what he did! Have it it, my friend.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 14:36, 23 February 2019 (EST)

Templates

Hey Rev, Bit of an odd one but I did some updating of the tag templates that the wiki uses (we have our first new tag in 6 years!:Template:AnnouncedProduct), I am trying to give the tags a slightly more uniform look and make them stand out a bit more. Way, way back in 2007 you added the Template:Stub to the protected list. Any chance you could take it off just long enough for me to give it a refresh?

my plan is for RefImprove, Cleanup, Stub, Update Needed and a couple of others to look like this: Template:Update Needed. Indicating the article could do with some more work.--Dmon (talk) 14:02, 26 July 2019 (EDT)

Removed edit protection. No idea why it was in place. Frabby (talk) 14:20, 26 July 2019 (EDT)
Cheers Frabby. Me neither but I am sure Rev will be able to tell us when he sees this.--Dmon (talk) 14:23, 26 July 2019 (EDT)
"I am sure Rev will be able to tell us when he sees this." [buzzer] No clue, not a one. Sorry. I dodn't see that i left any notes about why either. I'm appreciative of Frabby being on the ball about it, though. And the new images look spectacular. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 16:17, 11 August 2019 (EDT)

Edit Count

Just wanted to let you know you have exactly 8888 edits at the moment, according to your userscore. I thought that was neat. --DragonoftheRust (talk) 04:17, 15 October 2020 (EDT)

That is awesome! Next stop: 80,085 edits. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 15:18, 30 April 2021 (EDT)

Maps look great

Those new maps look really good. I've been away for a while (obviously) and seeing them was a nice welcome back!--Mbear(talk) 16:21, 3 November 2020 (EST)

Thank you, Mbear. A lot of planning by the team and far more work by Volt and Gruese. I've been seeing appreciation for the maps on Reddit, too, and it is certainly gratifying. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 15:19, 30 April 2021 (EDT)

Store links

Hi Rev, good to see you back in action! Have a virtual pat on the back buddy! :)

A word of caution though: You've been inserting store links into item articles (specifically, BattleRun 2). I think this is a bad idea. Using links to external sites has bitten Sarna in the back multiple times in the past already, because those links go obsolete in a heartbeat when the other site decides to change their makeup, or simply goes offline. We've seen a forum crash, two changes of link structure on the new forum, the death of BattleCorps and some other sites, and one or two revampings of the Catalyst store so far. In each and every case we suddenly had dead links on Sarna. To this day we're seeing occasional IP edits fixing or simply removing old store links from many years ago that are now dead links. My takeaway is to avoid external links like the plague, and straight out copy relevant online content (like official rulings) to talk pages to archive them there. Frabby (talk) 05:40, 4 May 2021 (EDT)

Thanks for the welcome, Frabby. Sure, I can recognize that danger, especially if it has already happened. The reasons for adding them are understood, but it appears the administrative cost is too high (don't get me started on how it is still difficult for new players to even find the store on the CGL site; I do my purchasing on DriveThru). As to adding store links, why don't we just remove them altogether? A large part of wikis involves copying wikicode and changing it. If we do away with it, then it won't be replicated by editors (and errant admin-types).--Revanche (talk|contribs) 08:02, 4 May 2021 (EDT)

Links to a list

Hello, do you know a way to jump to a specific point in a list? In the many articles from the various mech designs there is always a list with variants, but I cannot find a anker to jump at it. And I think the others editors are not interested to change the layout or the struture of the text for better navigation. --Neuling

Can you give me an example? As in, a certain 'Mech page with where you want to jump?--Revanche (talk|contribs) 11:53, 5 June 2021 (EDT)
Archer => Variants => ARC-8M — The preceding unsigned comment was posted by Neuling (talk • contribs) 11:55, 5 June 2021‎.
There might be. Let me mess around with it a bit and I'll get back to you.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 11:57, 5 June 2021 (EDT)
Ok, I don't know how "clean" this is, but these are the steps I took:
  1. In the 'Mech article, replace the variant code (ARC-1A) with the following: <span id="variantcode">Variant Code</span>. Change Variant Code to the same term that you replaced.
  2. Create a new article with the same name of the variant code, but have it redirect like this: #redirect [[Article name#variantcode]]
The variantcode you use as the span id can be anything you want, but be sure the redirect points to the term you use there.
Hope that helps. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 12:13, 5 June 2021 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://www.sarna.net/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Revanche&oldid=681952"