Category talk:State Units

"Units" is relatively vague, as it can refer to military formations, as well as individuals machines. Would anybody object to making this into a parent category ("Category:Military Units"), encompassing "Category:Clan Units", Category:Inner Sphere Units", "Category:Periphery Units", and "Category:Misc Units"? --Scaletail 19:32, 24 August 2008 (CDT)

Not at all. I think that is a perfectly fine idea. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 21:36, 24 August 2008 (CDT)
I think "Military formations" would fit better just to clearly differ it from all the hardware that is listed under Unit categories on the main page. Also we should go for "Inner Sphere State Units" and "Periphery State Units" just to make clear that we don't go just be the geographical position to define where it has to be placed or maybe we could end up with Ghost Bears in the IS category or Snow Ravens in the Periphery category(Snow Ravens did side with the Outworld Alliance in DA or?).
("Category:Military formations "), encompassing "Category:Clan Units", Category:Inner Sphere State Units", "Category:Periphery State Units", "Category:Mercenaries" and "Category:Misc Units".--BigDuke66 07:47, 25 August 2008 (CDT)
You bring up a good point: that my suggestion won't help alleviate confusion. After consulting the Field Manuals, I found/remembered that the military units are often referred to as "commands," so how about "Inner Sphere Commands," etc.? --Scaletail 18:49, 25 August 2008 (CDT)
I like that. I'd suggest having the parent be "Military Commands" and utilize "commands" in each of the child cats.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 21:49, 25 August 2008 (CDT)
A bit more simple how about "Forces". ("Category:Military Forces"), encompassing "Category:Clan Forces", Category:Inner Sphere State Forces", "Category:Periphery State Forces", and "Category:Misc Forces".--BigDuke66 06:27, 26 August 2008 (CDT)
I think it might be a little vague (for instance, would AFFS be categorized as "Inner Sphere Forces"?), but I am agreeable to that. --Scaletail 18:36, 26 August 2008 (CDT)
Why shouldn't the AFFS be categorized as "Inner Sphere State Forces"? Or did you mean AFFC?--BigDuke66 19:00, 26 August 2008 (CDT)
I too would prefer Commands over Forces. To me, when I think 'military forces,' I think of the combined military might of a state, rather than an individual...command. Command tells me there is a commander, rather than a commander-in-chief. I'd have to see the list under Forces to understand that it was individual military units. Like Scaletail, Forces isn't a bad choice; I just think Commands would be more accurate.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 19:04, 26 August 2008 (CDT)
I was referring to the article "AFFS". --Scaletail 19:08, 26 August 2008 (CDT)
Right "Forces" sounds too broad like anything from warship to commando units should be coverd. But "Commands" just makes me think of a broad area too. Check out [1] and the further going links about commands etc. maybe that will lead us somewhere. For me it makes me think of the different structures like Marches, Operational Theaters, PDZ, Combat Theaters, Prefecture and all this stuff. --BigDuke66 20:21, 26 August 2008 (CDT)

Be that as it may, "command" means something different in BattleTech. --Scaletail 20:49, 26 August 2008 (CDT)

Have we narrowed it down to "Forces" and "Commands" then? If so, I'll put it into the chatterweb, in order to solicit additional comments. Let me know, pls. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 21:43, 26 August 2008 (CDT)
If we want only regiments and smaller units in then I would vote for "Formations". If we want more in those categories like warships, brigades, commando units then we could think about "Forces" and "Commands", so what do we want? I guess those 3 are the candidates for now.--BigDuke66 13:23, 27 August 2008 (CDT)
This should definitely be open to commands/forces/formations/units of all types. I'll put this on the Chatterweb. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 13:34, 27 August 2008 (CDT)
I thought formations referred to national-level military units like "AFFC" and "TDF"? It was my understanding that Category:Military organizations was for those, while this category referred to regiment and smaller sized units. --Scaletail 19:37, 27 August 2008 (CDT)
Excepting that level, true. Spoke with less distinction than intended. I meant it shouldn't be limited to just ground units (where I got caught on his 'warships' inclusion. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 20:25, 27 August 2008 (CDT)


Since its been a few weeks and no additional comments have been added... I'm going to try again. I want to create/rename the following:

  • This category to "Military Commands," which would serve as a parent category for the following categories:
  • "Inner Sphere commands," encompassing all commands from the Successor States, FRR, Chaos March states, ComStar, and WoB.
  • "Periphery commands," encompassing all commands from near and deep Periphery nations
  • "Clan commands," encompassing all Clan units
  • Move all units in "Mercenaries" to "Mercenary commands" in the interest of uniformity. Whether we want to keep Mercenaries for other merc-related articles or simply redirect can be discussed later.

Note that this will be accompanied by a layer of links in articles that have not yet been created. Each formation article will link to an article on each of its brigades, which will then link to each regiment (the reverse will also be true). This will enable readers to flow up or down within the articles, so the categories can be broader. --Scaletail 12:20, 14 September 2008 (CDT)

Well maybe we should add "State" to the IS & periphery category and stick to the 5 big houses and the small spin-offs like Andurien, FRR & St. Ives all together that is already a lot.
What about a "Misc commands" category for WOB & ComStar(Both act in the periphery & IS), Pirates(Not sure where to draw the line between periphery states and bandit kingdoms) & other stuff like Wolverines, Chaos March, etc..--BigDuke66 18:03, 20 September 2008 (CDT)
Your point about ComStar & WoB operating in the Periphery is well-taken, as is your reasoning for "Miscellaneous commands." I'm worried that adding "state" will be confusing. I understand that is does differentiate them from mercenary units, but "state command" to me refers to the FedSuns and Lyran state commands of the FedCom, so, for instance "Inner Sphere state commands" sounds (to me) like a reference to a national-level organization. --Scaletail 10:06, 21 September 2008 (CDT)
Maybe we should first think about what goes into which category and then think about an appropriate name. What gives me a headache is the fact that some evolved over time. So where do we place things like Wolverines(Clan or Misc?), Pirates(Misc or Periphery), Wolf's Dragoons(Clan or mercenary?)? I guess best would be to place them based on their current or their last known status regarding the CBT timeline. So I think of it like this:
  • "Inner Sphere commands" = Steiner, Kurita, Davion, Liao, Marik, FRR, St. Ives, Andurien
  • "Periphery commands" = Magistracy of Canopus, Taurian Concordat, Outworld Alliance & minor periphery nations
  • "Clan commands" = all Clans
  • "Mercenary commands" = all mercenaries
  • "Misc commands" = ComStar, WoB, Pirates, Wolverines, Chaos March
--BigDuke66 09:48, 23 September 2008 (CDT)
I think that's a fair idea. For the most part I agree, but I don't think we need as many units in "Misc." Why would you consider the Wolverine's separate? They were a Clan until they fled and became part of C*, then WoB. As such, "Clan Wolverine" should be considered a Clan. AFAIK, there are no distinctly "Clan Wolverine" units following the Minnesota Tribe attacks. I also think that the few Chaos March units that existed can be filed under "Inner Sphere," as that's where the Chaos March is, just the same as every other place that falls under "IS commands." I honestly wish we could do away with Misc. commands entirely, but I see the need for it, as not everything is so neat. Everything else looks good to me. --Scaletail 18:36, 23 September 2008 (CDT)