User talk:Dmon/Archive 2022

Trade Associations[edit]

Everybody probably loves my belated afterthoughts; but wouldn’t "Mercantile Association" be a better term? Also, what about overlap with similar organisations like Political Organizations (eg. BranthKeepers]])? Frabby (talk) 07:53, 12 January 2022 (EST)

I had to actually look it up before posting last night and Trade Association is the correct term. Suprisingly Trade Association has an article on wikipedia and loads of hits on ecosia (my favored search engine) but plugging Mercantile Association into ecosia our own Ozawa Mercantile Association article comes up as the fourth spot. As for overlap, it is pretty huge and we very likely could do without the TA category, but I feel it is worth having just to seperate stuff like the MRBC and Solaris Gaming Commission out from stuff like Democracy Now or Free Skye.--Dmon (talk) 08:40, 12 January 2022 (EST)

Special Pilot Abilities[edit]

Why do you think the page should be deleted. Just not to waste energy on it.--Pserratv (talk) 07:49, 20 January 2022 (EST)

Was ust putting an explanation on the talk page actually.. Talk:Special Pilot Abilities.--Dmon (talk) 07:50, 20 January 2022 (EST)

Delete pages 2022 I[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Can you delete these categories:

Thanks!--Pserratv (talk) 04:28, 24 January 2022 (EST)

Will do sir!--Dmon (talk) 05:10, 24 January 2022 (EST)
Please, take this one out too: Category:Individual Capellan Confederation WarShips. Thanks in advance.--Pserratv (talk) 05:40, 24 January 2022 (EST)

InfoBoxFirearm[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Not sure if you did the change, but the color of InfoBoxFirearm is not giving good contract with letters in black, at least for me it is a bit more complex to read? Could we change the color of the box?


Regards, Pere Serrat--Pserratv (talk) 12:55, 24 January 2022 (EST)

hey PS, we didn't have an infoBox at all so FireArms is one I have in development, I thought it might be cool to have a "camo green" shade for the infantry weapons but it does not really work. I shall find a lighter shade.--Dmon (talk) 02:34, 25 January 2022 (EST)
The idea is superb, the only thing is the detail on the color that makes it reading very complex!--Pserratv (talk) 05:44, 25 January 2022 (EST)
I have changed the color to a lighter shade that hopfully works better.--Dmon (talk) 05:47, 25 January 2022 (EST)
Great, it looks perfect and readable!--Pserratv (talk) 05:56, 25 January 2022 (EST)

Uncategorized categories[edit]

This category Uncategorized categories is getting bigger. I'm trying to group some of them, but sincerely I do not know how to make it better... I feel some of them if not most can be part of an existing category.--Pserratv (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2022 (EST)

I would not worry too much about it. Most of them are wiki functions rather than editor stuff or are fairly self contained, Category:BattleTech Universe Products for example is intended as a "top of the ladder" category that covers product ever made that canbe associated with BT. Some, like Category:Characters and Category:Stellar Cartography could possibly go up one step to say Category:BattleTech Universe but after that I think that is the top of that ladder as well.--Dmon (talk) 05:58, 25 January 2022 (EST)
Some of it, like Category:BattleTech Publications Record Property is Deadfire doing... something. Deadfire is fantastic at wiki code but I have no idea what he is aiming for, certainly not having useful features or fixing things we need. The best way to describe my conversations with him on the subject would be:
  • Me - "Deadfire, what does that code you just put on the wiki do?"
  • DF - "Pressing the A key on your keyboard to type the letter A is great, now we have 17 new ways to type the letter A, each one much more complicated than simply pressing the A key. Isn't that an amazing feature to have?"
  • Me - "But why?"
  • DF - "Because it makes the wiki much better having 18 ways to type the letter A"
  • Me - (facepalm)

--Dmon (talk) 06:16, 25 January 2022 (EST)

RE: Battle of Nashira[edit]

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction! The First FedSuns Lancers' part of the battle of 3039 already had a lot of wordy details that didn't pertain to the unit, so trimming it down was essential. Starting work on the Nashira article now! Mage (talk) 10:13, 25 January 2022 (EST)

I thought it might be something you would be interestedcin,--Dmon (talk) 10:55, 25 January 2022 (EST)

Appreciate it! The formatting didn't make sense to me but looks way better now. Making a mental note of it! Mage (talk) 20:10, 26 January 2022 (EST)

House Humphreys family tree[edit]

Since you're pretty much the expert, I wanted to raise the position of Samuel Humphreys with you in the family tree on the House Humphreys page. It says Morgaine, Catherine's aunt, would have had two unknown siblings. But we don't know that. Samuel could be Morgaine's child (and not be eligible as her successor for some reason; we know that Morgaine pretty much groomed Catherine to succeed her anyways so maybe he simply didn't want the job). Or am I missing some information?

Sidenote, according to the one of the German-only Andurien Wars novels Catherine sent her son Richard into exile after Dalma's birth and he lived with his uncle Samuel on Kanata, an ancient Humphreys fief, for a time. Unless that uncle was on his (unnamed) father's side, I presume that might have been Samuel Humphreys, cousin not sibling to Richard's mother. By extension, it could thus be speculated that Delburton is on Kanata. Frabby (talk) 10:51, 28 January 2022 (EST)

Hey Frabby, I am away from my books right now but if memory serves, I listed two unknown siblings because the original source for Samuel lists him as "first cousin" to Catherine but makes no mention of Morgaine. Samuel could very well be Morgaines son, but the real world tends to have a social hierarchy that would make "son of former duchess" more notable than "first cousin of current duchess", So I have assumed that two siblings exist(ed). The truth of the matter is that nobody at FASA did any family trees beyond the big 6.
The stuff from that Andurien Wars novel sounds like it could be slotted into canon pretty easily, I wonder what else we have on Kanata.--Dmon (talk) 13:40, 28 January 2022 (EST)

Delete pages 2022 II[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Can you delete this file: "File:Natasha Kerensky MA2LW.jpg" I did upload it incorrectly and amended it... but now I cannot delete it :)--Pserratv (talk) 04:20, 15 February 2022 (EST)

Do you mean the Natalia one as I can't find a Natasha one?--Dmon (talk) 04:48, 15 February 2022 (EST)

Natalia Kerensky MA2LW.jpg

It was my mistake. I uploaded Natasha when it was Natalia. I do not know of Natasha Kerensky appearing in MechAssault 2 Lone Wolf.--Pserratv (talk) 06:58, 17 February 2022 (EST)

Renaming Files[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Is there any way to rename a file and ensure all links are not broken? I've seen several flag banners incorrectly named which mixes things a lot in my mind, but I do not want to cause disaster by renaming them... and I mean renaming so they are ordered correctly... any suggestion?--Pserratv (talk) 03:53, 8 March 2022 (EST)

Infobox Suggestions[edit]

Hello, Dmon!
I seem to recall you inviting feedback on infoboxes for various things. If this is the wrong place for this one, I ask you kindly redirect me to the proper place:
For the Planet infobox, "Jump Point distance" is given as just a number. There is no ready context for what that number means. Whenever we get around to updating that infobox, could it act similarly to the BattleMech infobox (which appends km/h) and append "days at 1G"? I realize that is technically "days at 1G with turnover at midpoint" but that would be a bit much. --Talvin (talk) 15:26, 12 March 2022 (EST)

Perfect place for it as on discord thing vanish over time! I think it is a good idea as well, exactly the kind of input I want.--Dmon (talk) 03:28, 13 March 2022 (EDT)

Removed defunct Titles and Positions table[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Just saw you deleted a table with this comment: "Removed defunct Titles and Positions table". When was this decided? Because I've been adding it from time to time so...--Pserratv (talk) 11:51, 14 March 2022 (EDT)

It has been on the cards for quite a long time, The tables where my first real attempt at charting the various titles and positions but they where always very clunky. Now that we have articles filled out for most titles and positions that fit neatly into the infobox the shift can finally be made. There is a loss in functionallity but the tables also has some severe problems when the same person filled a position more than once.--Dmon (talk) 12:02, 14 March 2022 (EDT)

House Marsden[edit]

Quick Q: Should Alexandre Marsden get some sort of mention in House Marsden? --Talvin (talk) 10:39, 15 March 2022 (EDT)

Given that we have no link, I would say no.--Dmon (talk) 11:40, 15 March 2022 (EDT)
Fair 'nuff.--Talvin (talk) 11:41, 15 March 2022 (EDT)

Delete pages 2022 II[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Can you please delete these two categories:

Thanks.--Pserratv (talk) 10:13, 18 March 2022 (EDT)

Senators of the Republic of the Sphere[edit]

Heya, Dmon,

Gonna start by copypasting my comment from the talk page for Senator of Augustine: "So, we have a Canon Conflict issue, here. Dark Age: Republic of the Sphere, p. 3 - "The Senate" says, and I quote, "The citizens of each Prefecture elect three to four Senators—depending upon the number of worlds in the Prefecture—to serve in the Senate." Same source, it is "a body of thirty to forty individuals". At its height, the RoS had over 200 systems divided into ten Prefectures, Roman numerals I through X. I think the Senator was from Augustine, but would have served as Senator of the Prefecture in which Augustine lay: Prefecture VII. I lack most of the Republic source material, so I am going to hold off until someone with better sources can cross-check me on this. I am open to the possibility that the canon also directly contradicts itself on this issue: the whole thing seems a muddled mess."

I have looked into it some more, and by comparing Senators with known origins to which Prefecture their world lies in, I came up with this: User:Talvin/Other Projects#Senators_and_Prefectures. It appears to check out, accounting for not all of these people being in office at the same time, and for not all Senators being named/known.

You created the office pages for "Senator of", and before I upended that, I wanted to touch base with you, see how you feel about either moving the existing ones to "Senator of Prefecture [Roman Numeral]", or else just merging them into the relevant Prefecture pages.--Talvin (talk) 11:07, 26 March 2022 (EDT)

Main issue is I remember seeing senators refered to as "Senator from" and "Senator of" but it has ALWAYS been a planet NEVER a prefecture unless ih as been written "senator xxxx from xxx in prefecture x", I own all of the source material, so eventually I am going to go back and double check. As is I am not sure why you need to copy paste this onto all of the other senator articles?--Dmon (talk) 12:47, 26 March 2022 (EDT)
"As is I am not sure why you need to copy paste this onto all of the other senator articles?" Yeah, neither am I? I copied from the discussion that I put on that particular page, because that is the one I was working on at the time. I brought it over here for clarity. Except I don't see how that relates to your statement, so...can you please clarify?--Talvin (talk) 12:54, 26 March 2022 (EDT)
I read that as you saying that you where going to copy paste that comment onto all of the senator articles because you believe they are incorrect... Rereading it, I myself am now a little confused as to why I interpreted it as that.... Literally just home from work and very obviously my brain has not restarted yet....
Anyway, back to the actual issue. I am pretty sure it is a case of canon contradicting itself. Dark Age: Republic of the Sphere is one of, if not the earliest source of most info on the Republic. Hold off changing anything for now as I have all the sources and hopfully, my super busy work situation is starting to settle down. I will be able to get back to Sarna properly in the next few weeks.--Dmon (talk) 13:06, 26 March 2022 (EDT)
I will leave it in your hands, but I will leave that work I did on my Userspace page in case you find you do need to refer to it.--Talvin (talk) 13:11, 26 March 2022 (EDT)

Covert Ops as Conflicts?[edit]

Something to come back to when things are less hectic: should Category:Covert Operations articles use a conflict infobox, something custom for them, or stay as they are? I feel like something that gives a quick summary would be good. Just tossing this here before I forget.--Talvin (talk) 19:53, 26 March 2022 (EDT)

I am thinking to just use the standard conflict box rather than develop a custom one. But the Conflict box is still on the list to get an overhaul so we can tweek it to be flexible.--Dmon (talk) 20:20, 26 March 2022 (EDT)

Query with infoBoxSportsTeam[edit]

hi Dmon,

Because of the resolution of the image, I would like to make Marpesia Stables image just 50px... but I cannot. Could you give me a hand with this please?


Regards,--Pserratv (talk) 10:22, 2 May 2022 (EDT)

The infobox is set in such a way that they are all standard. Change the core and all of them change.--Dmon (talk) 11:58, 2 May 2022 (EDT)

PM231[edit]

Hi Dmon, Just wondering, why did you revert my addition of categories to the above article? Echo Mirage (talk) 21:54, 10 May 2022 (EDT)

Left a note on your page about it!--Dmon (talk) 21:55, 10 May 2022 (EDT)
Just saw it thanks! Replied there. Echo Mirage (talk) 22:01, 10 May 2022 (EDT)

Notes and Rules[edit]

I have been through every page down-tree from Category:Military Commands and removed empty and functionally-empty Notes and Rules sections. I took a sampling from things that come under Category:Support Vehicles and Category:Spacecraft classes but did not find the same issues in my samples. Closing out this from my own task list, but if you find another Category that has a lot of blank notes/rules sections, let me know and I'll tackle it.--Talvin (talk) 10:58, 18 May 2022 (EDT)

Good work and thank you.--Dmon (talk) 20:30, 18 May 2022 (EDT)

Xanthos (SLDF)[edit]

Hi again. Could I please ask why you deleted the above redirect? Echo Mirage (talk) 10:56, 19 May 2022 (EDT)

From the discussion on your talk page a standard link to the Xanthos is all that is needed.--Dmon (talk) 11:42, 19 May 2022 (EDT)
I not sure I quite follow your reasoning there. The debate wasn't on whether or not the Xanthos had seen some service with the SLDF, but exactly what version in service with the CCAF had the SLDF Division in question had received. (GreekFire didn't think the relevant text in Field Manual: SLDF was explicit enough on the matter, hence the somewhat unsatisfactory compromise wording in the article.) Echo Mirage (talk) 13:46, 20 May 2022 (EDT)
The Xanthos simply being in service with the SLDF is not enough of an arguement for this redirect to exist, even if you could 100% verify that it was a SLDF specific version I would still not be a fan of this redirect. We have a saying around here "Don't try to out MUL the MUL" in reference to Catalysts Master Unit List.
I am of the opinion that Category:SLDF Combat Vehicles, Category:SLDF Royal Combat Vehicles, Category:SLDF 2750 DropShip classes, Category:SLDF Royal BattleMechs, Category:Star League BattleMechs are all on very questionable ground as to why we even have them on the wiki as dedicated categories because the Star League did not really have its own manufacturing capacity.--Dmon (talk) 14:35, 20 May 2022 (EDT)
I am not sure where to start here. Quite apart from the small technicality of anything made in a Star League member state during its existence was 'made in the Star League', the Terran Hegemony, with all its massive industrial might, formed the core of the Star League. It was more than merely 'just' the capital region of the Star League. The Hegemony had been for all intents and purposes been all but subsumed into the core structure of the League, economically, politically and militarily to such a degree that, when the Star League finally died, so did the Terran Hegemony. And even with regards as to the more autonomous members of the League, a not inconsiderable part of their own industrial output was available for common purposes such as defense. Or at least that was the case up to the time of the infamous Taxation Edict of 2763; after which the Free Worlds League in particular suspended all co-operation with the SLDF including prohibiting private companies from even selling basic supplies and services in many cases.
As to the MUL, I'll just note that a fair few canon units don't have even have entries yet, though I have no doubt that the team behind it are hard at work rectifying this. Echo Mirage (talk) 15:44, 23 May 2022 (EDT)
In a way you have kinda answered your own question. "small technicality of anything made in a Star League member state" is pretty much the issue and leaves us with two options. First option is to include basically everything in the category or the second option is to count the member states as the manufacturer instead of the star league. Since we are specifically making the stand that we are not a force building resource the second option makes more sense to me. Your arguement about the Terran Hegemony being essentially absorbed into the Star League is also a valid arguement but it does hinge on the "all intents and purpose" aspect, that introduces a lot of grey area, the hegemony did still exist and planets where officially still listed as controlled by the hegemony so that allows us to say a unit manufactured on a hegemony world is "manufactured by the terran hegemony" whilst basing it on something we can cite as a fact rather than trying to express the political neuance in a system not built to do such things.
As for the MUL, I can't really comment on how up-to-date it is, I do know that several of the Sarna crew are also part of that team over at CGL but I am not one of them, I have more to do with the fact checking team.--Dmon (talk) 18:34, 23 May 2022 (EDT)

Titles and Positions[edit]

Just remove those sections, or is there some other process in addition?--Talvin (talk) 14:01, 20 May 2022 (EDT)

As long as the info in the section has been carried over to the relevant title/position article then it is just a straight up removal.--Dmon (talk) 14:14, 20 May 2022 (EDT)
Done what I can here. Some individual pages, and anything to do with the Republic of the Sphere, I left alone because of problems reconciling sources/pages. Also, some military titles (like leaders of some units.) If in doubt, I just left it as is and moved on. Estimating I got 90% of the ones out there.--Talvin (talk) 10:20, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
Amazing!--Dmon (talk) 14:36, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
Just went through Category:Titles and Positions and the subcategories thereof and checked everybody listed for each title for a Titles and Position section/box, and pulled citations over where I could find them in that section. Tedious more than anything. Those that got snarled and weird, I said, "OK, I am going to leave this for Dmon or somebody else to handle."--Talvin (talk) 15:36, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
Still a whole heap of work though. I am actively trying to slay that Porrima one you noted earlier, not found it but have managed to pull out a few other ones instead!--Dmon (talk) 15:41, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
Yes, that is one of those. I know I left the Archons alone because there is a lot of debate over what constitutes "Archon" versus "Regent", and the Republic of the Sphere stuff is so confused that I now actively avoid editing pages relating to it. I think there were a few Coordinators where I stepped away and said, "Nope." I'll see if I can recall a few others, I should have made a list.--Talvin (talk) 15:45, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
Indeed, I am still not sure what to do with the Republic senator thing, I have it on the "are you feeling brave today" version of the to do list--Dmon (talk) 15:51, 3 June 2022 (EDT)
Here are the ones I felt concerned enough about to put something on the Talk page: Talk:Robert Dinesen, Talk:Prince's Champion, Talk:Garner Kerensky, Talk:Duke of Marik.--Talvin (talk) 15:52, 3 June 2022 (EDT)

Delete pages 2022 III[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Can you delete these pages:--Pserratv (talk) 12:48, 2 June 2022 (EDT)

Done sir--Dmon (talk) 14:36, 3 June 2022 (EDT)

Jackie Darwin[edit]

Hi Dmon. I've see you've erased my addition to Ace Darwin's page. I put it again in Notes, pointing than Jackie may be a posible descendant. It is ok? I think is an important adition.— The preceding unsigned comment was posted by Fredericmora (talkcontribs) .

Hey Fred, I just left a note on your profile about it actually. Putting it in the notes section of the article is ok. The character is obviously a nod to Ace Darwin, and yes she is likely going to be a decendent but we have no evidence of it at this point.--Dmon (talk) 21:55, 18 June 2022 (EDT)

Ok i understand. Thanks for leaving it. I think is important to at least mention it. I expect this promising personnage appears in some novel! Template:Fredericmora

I have added a note that both had Mercenary units named the WhipIts, if someone feels that is not strong enough let's discuss it on Jackie Darwin's Talk Page.--Talvin (talk) 21:57, 18 June 2022 (EDT)

Position of coördinates text on planet articles[edit]

Hi, Dmon.

I've noticed you sometimes move the XY coördinates boilerplate on planet articles. Is there something I should know about the reason for its placement? Madness Divine (talk) 00:26, 27 June 2022 (EDT)

Just me moving it about as I feel. I am however thinking that when I upgrade the system infobox it should become part of the box rather than free floating text.--Dmon (talk) 03:34, 27 June 2022 (EDT)

Project Banners[edit]

When I see a Project Banner on the Article Page (typically Project Clans), is that supposed to be moved to the Talk Page? I think I have seen that being done, but didn't want to jump in without checking.--Talvin (talk) 19:03, 29 June 2022 (EDT)

Yes, project banners for all the other projects are on the talk page.--Dmon (talk) 19:24, 29 June 2022 (EDT)
Think I got them all. Some of the Clan pages were missing that banner, I added it to the talk pages. I did not add it to pages like History or Touman, not sure of the intent of the project there.--Talvin (talk) 19:39, 29 June 2022 (EDT)

Delete Redirect[edit]

Hello Dmon, Could you delete the redirect page at File:BattleTech Legenden 26 - Ich bin Jadefalke.jpg? I mistaken moved File:Ich bin Jadefalke.jpg to that when I meant to move File:Ich bin Jadefalke reprint.jpg. I moved it back but of course the residual redirect page prevents me from moving to that spot the page I truly want there. Thanks. --Dude RB (talk) 23:18, 29 June 2022 (EDT)

Done--Dmon (talk) 03:18, 30 June 2022 (EDT)
Thanks. --Dude RB (talk) 18:17, 30 June 2022 (EDT)

Are we moving the (Faction) Planets Categories to (Faction) Systems Categories?[edit]

If we are, I am willing to assist.--Talvin (talk) 19:25, 30 June 2022 (EDT)

That is the intent. It is a massive project so any assistance is appreciated.--Dmon (talk) 20:01, 30 June 2022 (EDT)
I also have an idea to help sort out the 'Mech categories a bit but I need to have a chat with Deadfire about some coding first.--Dmon (talk) 20:01, 30 June 2022 (EDT)
The auto-categorizing does do some things that seem to conflict with our intent. And I will work on moving categories from [[Category:Clan Jade Falcon Planets]] to [[Category:Clan Jade Falcon Systems]] (example).--Talvin (talk) 20:07, 30 June 2022 (EDT)
I hope to use Deadfires coding skill to retask that auto-categorizing to match our purpose, leaving just a bit of clean-up rather than manually re-doing all the Mechs.
Have at the Planet>System change sir! I am mostly done for today so I will pick up again tomorrow evening.--Dmon (talk) 20:12, 30 June 2022 (EDT)
This is going to be a loooong project. That's fine, I like having at least one of those going at all times.--Talvin (talk) 20:14, 30 June 2022 (EDT)
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/index.php?title=Achernar&redirect=no and similar. Guidance? --Talvin (talk) 09:39, 1 July 2022 (EDT)
Expanding on this a bit: I started going through alphabetically, until I realized that Category:Independent Planets accounts for ~1/3 of the pages I need to adjust categories on. So I am knocking those out first in one big Zelazny-esque hellride to lighten the load in other categories, and when that is done I will start up again with the 'C's. I am finding redirects that are categorized with Category: (Faction) Planets, and the redirects are to specific planets. Recategorizing those to system is incorrect, but the planet categories are getting moved. If you look at Independent Planets, you will see a cluster of those building up at the start of the list as I work through recategorizing the rest. How are we to deal with categories on Planet Redirects?--Talvin (talk) 12:15, 1 July 2022 (EDT)
How to handle planets is a bit multi-layered and involves messing about with redirects. A good example is Carver. Carver is the "system" and the categories state that but if you go down to the planet category, Carver IV and Carver V are redirects to relevant sections of the carver system article, Liberty also gets a redirect to the "Carver V (Liberty)" section. The redirects to specific planets should not be transitioned over to Category (faction) system, instead they lose all faction related tags only to keep the Planet category.
Does that make sense?--Dmon (talk) 11:24, 2 July 2022 (EDT)
That is the answer I expected, but I did not feel safe presuming: strip all faction categories from Planet Redirects. Will do. I expect to be done with Independent Planets in a couple hours at most, then, and then I will do a quick pass through for any factions that got cleared in the doing of those and move those as well. (Oberon Confederation, I already know got cleared.)--Talvin (talk) 11:27, 2 July 2022 (EDT)
Ta-da: Category:Independent Systems 993 pages of 3,112 total. I am trying to only touch a given system page one time, fixing all the categories therein with no need for return visits; so as we progress, the number of articles in a given Faction Planets category will get smaller and smaller, and some will be empty and ready to move when we reach them.--Talvin (talk) 12:13, 2 July 2022 (EDT)
Well done sir! I have already moved over a few of the smaller categories.--Dmon (talk) 12:15, 2 July 2022 (EDT)
I have been warned by the Wiki to take a break: toward the end I managed to trigger a DBQuery Error when trying to submit a page, gave it a minute, tried again and it went through. I am going to let the Process complete its Jobs before I do anymore after such a large chunk. My old software dev friends said (only half-joking), "If Talvin can't break it, it's ready to ship." I have taken down a supercomputer cluster hard enough it had to be physically powered down and back up by testing a form once upon a time (showstopper bug!), I would rather Nic not think of me in such manner. Back in a few hours.--Talvin (talk) 12:19, 2 July 2022 (EDT)

Category:Clan Homeworlds Systems instead of Planets for the descriptions and categories? Ditto for the subcategories?--Talvin (talk) 15:47, 2 July 2022 (EDT)

I actually didn't move it over on purpose as I am yet to decide what to do with it. It is different from the other categories because it is not a faction as such.--Dmon (talk) 15:49, 2 July 2022 (EDT)
Noted.--Talvin (talk) 15:58, 2 July 2022 (EDT)

Infobox templates[edit]

Hi, Dmon

Would it be possible to make some changes to the various vehicle infoboxes? Off the top of my head:

  • model to those that don't have it
  • split fuel and range for vehicles
  • split movement attributes for LAMs into their three modes

Thanks either way. Madness Divine (talk) 12:09, 1 July 2022 (EDT)

I intend to have a discussion with Deadfire at some point in the near future about how best to overhaul the unit infoboxes, I shall add these requests to the list of requirements.--Dmon (talk) 11:33, 2 July 2022 (EDT)

This is on me.[edit]

While trying to move Category:Clan Sea Fox Planets, I had a bad Keyboard Smash Incident in which this happened: Category:Clan Sea Fox Sgs\\\\. Both are now locked and have been for a bit, so I cannot tag either for deletion. Category:Clan Sea Fox Systems appears to be fine and functional. Nothing links to either of the others. My apologies, and I hope one of the Admins can get those first two unlocked/deleted.--Talvin (talk) 19:35, 2 July 2022 (EDT)

Planets to Systems, moving forward.[edit]

I have done a first pass through of every change that got done automatically, fixing broken stuff. I am going to review every single change more closely because I can already see some collateral damage. The last word I saw from you was to leave Clan Planets alone while you thought about what you wanted to do with it: do you want me to revert those?
I have a bad feeling I am still going to be fixing stuff from this in a year.--Talvin (talk) 20:36, 2 July 2022 (EDT)

That was me using the text replacement tool to change both category tags and the title of the categories from "Plants -> Systems". As your changes are in the job queue, those were not touched. There may be some unavoidable changes that must be done manually, however the greater part of this work is done. I did deselect items to not have their contents replaced however either the tool did it anyway, or I missed it somehow. If you do find any other mass changes done like this, please let me know. Also you did an awesome job with those you have done, I hope there isn't too many that need to be reverted. --Deadfire (talk) 20:44, 2 July 2022 (EDT)
I now have to go through every single one because this cut out the chance to handle some other stuff that needed to be done by hand. So...basically, it has saved me zero time, made it take longer. And I may not catch it all, now.--Talvin (talk) 20:46, 2 July 2022 (EDT)
Should I remove any Category:Planets links if there's a Category:Systems in place? Madness Divine (talk) 22:24, 2 July 2022 (EDT)
I think "Ah, fuck" is fairly appropriate. Don't reverse the Clan stuff I will sort it out. What other collateral damage has been done Talvin?
Category:Planets is fine to stay in most cases Madness Divine, it is the Category (faction) Planets that is outright being replaced.--Dmon (talk) 22:39, 2 July 2022 (EDT)
I am not going to know how much damage was done until I have a chance to review every page that got changed by the automated tool, which I estimate to be around 2,700 pages last night. I only got through the 'A's last night. It was told to replace " Planets]]" with " Systems]]", it seems, which missed cases like Planets|Foo]] but changed things like "Project Planets]]" and "Brotherhood of Planets]]" even on pages that were not relevant to this project at all. It also caught the Planet Redirects that we were removing faction-related categories from, and for all I know it caught some without that. I heartily wish that we had had a chance to discuss this option and at least refine the targeting (like using the full name of each targeted category over multiple runs, and not moving categories until they had been verified to be emptied!), but we didn't. I was in the middle of working and suddenly...whoosh...everything went to hell.
At the rate of progress you and I were making, Dmon, I was expecting we would be done with this tomorrow. Now? I have no clue. If I push myself to fix a totally avoidable and unnecessary problem I did not make, I may have most of it done by the end of the week. You know my feelings about the "Senior Editor" experiment, just take them and bump them up an order of magnitude, now. And please, I am begging you, restrict the text replacement tool to Admins, it's a dangerous tool in the hands of the inexperienced and reckless.--Talvin (talk) 11:03, 3 July 2022 (EDT)
Excellent example of why we don't do this: Coyote Bay Collective. Nowhere near the categories we were dealing with, and Requiem for Three Planets was autochanged to Requiem for Three Systems.--Talvin (talk) 12:11, 3 July 2022 (EDT)

Tangential Observation: Some Systems are in Category:Systems, some are in Category:Planets, many are in both, some are only in one or the other. A few in neither. I am mostly leaving those alone unless it is the result of the automated replace and needs to be rolled back, but for a future project, we may want to come up with a standard for that and enact it. --Talvin (talk) 15:28, 3 July 2022 (EDT)

There is already a standard, as of yesterday before the automation moved lots of stuff.. Every system upto Totness was correctly tagged. The system/planets that have both are the ones we have no data for exactly what planet within the system is the inhabited one. after Totness there will be a mix as I had not manually checked everything.--Dmon (talk) 17:00, 3 July 2022 (EDT)
Gotcha. Task for later.--Talvin (talk) 17:06, 3 July 2022 (EDT)
I admit that right now I am almost scared to check if the pre-Totness stuff has been screwed-up.--Dmon (talk) 17:10, 3 July 2022 (EDT)
The trick to eating an elephant is to do so one bite at a time. The trick to an elephant buffet is to stick to one elephant at a time.--Talvin (talk) 17:28, 3 July 2022 (EDT)

Leaving Port Vail with the faction categories as-is, since it is a redirect involving a system that has had more than one name over time. If this is incorrect, please strip those categories and let me know to do likewise on others.--Talvin (talk) 15:22, 4 July 2022 (EDT). ADDING: Ditto with Qualip.--Talvin (talk) 15:24, 4 July 2022 (EDT)

Status Update[edit]

So, Good News, Bad News.

Good news: I had originally estimated 2,700 pages I would have to review as part of this, I was basing this on the jump in the responsible party's user score overnight. Three mass Find-and-Replace jobs were run. The other two jobs appear to have been far more responsible in targeting full and specific categories, and a random sampling shows no collateral damage. I feel reasonably confident ignoring those.

Bad news: That "only" left me ~2,000 entries to sort through. At this time I have 500 left to do, and I hope to be done with them by tomorrow evening. It was only partway through that I found out I needed to do a closer examination of any page that had Category: Systems and not Category: Planets, as some of the ones in Planets got changed to Systems: if a page has the same category twice in the code, it only shows it once. It is a probability nearing certainty that I missed some of those, and I am just too tired and wrathful to run through it all again. I did find some collateral damage inside the Systems Category that I had to correct, like Planet redirects being recategorized as Systems, and I (and others) also found some damage that landed very far afield. A much better chance that all of those will be caught and corrected, at least.

I had this on my to-do list:

  • Find the former Planets categories that are currently redirects and check to see if anything is still stuck there. Once that is fixed, check for anything linking there, and then flag for deletion. Any that are already deleted, Dmon got, so it's good.

I see that you deleted 18 such categories today, which I assume involved checking for any strays. Is that done, then, or are there possibly still some to check through? In any case, thanks for dealing with those 18.

I'll report again when I finish.--Talvin (talk) 15:48, 4 July 2022 (EDT)

Yeah those 18 are clear, and I will het a few more done now and tomorrow.--Dmon (talk) 17:41, 4 July 2022 (EDT)
I'll just take that off my list and leave it for you, then.--Talvin (talk) 17:43, 4 July 2022 (EDT)
[Leaving this for you to make the call. Normally I would undo, but it looks like a system, not a planet. --Talvin (talk) 18:20, 4 July 2022 (EDT)
Alright. I went through every single page that was touched by that first Text Replacement Tool job, and in each I either: saw nothing for concern; rolled it back or otherwise corrected it; removed (Faction) Systems categories from planet redirects; or found something that I needed to bring to your attention or general attention. I then went through every subcategory of Category:Systems looking for planet redirects that should not be in there. Looks like we got them all. I am leaving the checking and deletion of the still-existing (Faction) Planets categories to you.
Not the perfect score I was hoping for, but much better than I had feared. And I am done.--Talvin (talk) 21:29, 4 July 2022 (EDT)

Text replacement tool[edit]

Dmon, I see references to a text replacement tool. Is this something I could use on strings like <ref> House Kurita (The Draconis Combine), p? If so, how do I find it?

There are lots of little jobs that have high signal-to-noise ratios due to fuzzy search overriding literals when I'm using the search page. Madness Divine (talk) 13:35, 3 July 2022 (EDT)

As I had said when you asked this on Talvin's user page (which he removed) If you give me a list of "exactly" what you need replaced to what, I can run it. I can set it to only replace text in a certain category (as well as setting it to look at titles of the pages or just the text on them) However as I am inexperienced and reckless (even though I have used it multiple times in the course of 2 years here on this wiki and tried to take care of using it each time), I can understand if you wish me not to complete this venture.--Deadfire (talk) 13:40, 3 July 2022 (EDT)
My to-do list currently runs 26 pages, some of which will only occur sometimes depending on context. Some would work with the tool, some would not. And I keep running across new things. If you were me, would you feel comfortable asking somebody else to do each item, especially the new ones you run across? Madness Divine (talk) 13:56, 3 July 2022 (EDT)
The tool can use regular expressions for text replacement. (Example: values of "a(.*)c" for "Original text:" and "ac$1" for "Replacement text:" would replace "abc" with "acb".). Additionally I make it show the edits done in the "Recent Changes" to enable easy rollbacks.
Sounds a little above my skill level. Not that I can find it, despite Talvin's pointer to the Move page. Madness Divine (talk) 14:41, 3 July 2022 (EDT)
After this I am very much thinking that the Text replacement tool should be an Admin level request only.--Dmon (talk) 17:02, 3 July 2022 (EDT)

This just in.[edit]

Intel reports there are puppies and kittens on this planet. Perhaps something lighter to consider when you have time.--Talvin (talk) 18:01, 3 July 2022 (EDT)

Which is better?[edit]

When inserting an apostrophe that won't be mistaken for bold/italics, is there one markup that's preferred to another? One choice is the nowiki operator, the other begins with an ampersand. (And getting either to appear here as a string instead of an apostrophe is eluding me.) Madness Divine (talk) 14:55, 2 August 2022 (EDT)

I might not be the best person to ask this one as my wikicode skills are just what I have picked up along the way rather than any knowledge base. As my rule of thumb if two different methods of doing the same thing are available go with the simplest one. It increases the chance of a new editor having a "So that is how that is done!" moment, thus low key benefiting us all.--Dmon (talk) 17:04, 2 August 2022 (EDT)
There is no rule. Personally, once I knew the ampersand code I took to using it as my default approach to the problem. As a sidenote, apostrophes other than ' are deprecated on the Sarna wiki. Mostly for ease of article linking i guess. Frabby (talk) 17:27, 2 August 2022 (EDT)

Bloodname ranking sort order[edit]

First of all, thanks for creating an organized template for Bloodhouses, and the notable members for each Bloodhouse.

I was looking for a "Bloodname" template to discuss this topic, but I don't see a Bloodname template. Since you seem to be the one who created/s most of the Bloodname articles, your talk page seems like the next best choice to discuss.

The "Field Officer" section seems to have an implied sort order of warriors of Galaxy Commander rank or lower, with highest ranks presented first, with lowest ranks presented last.

Overall question: What should be the rank precedence of this list?

Subquestion 1: Which of the ranks of number 1 should be listed first, aka which rank should be listed before the other, Galaxy Commander or Star Admiral?

Subquestion 2: Which of the ranks of number 2 should be listed first, aka which rank should be listed before the other, Star Colonel or Star Commodore?

Subquestion 3: Should rank unspecified really be at the bottom of the list?

  1. Galaxy Commander/Star Admiral (aka naval equivalent of Galaxy Commander)
  2. Star Colonel/Star Commodore (aka naval equivalent of Star Colonel)
  3. Nova Captain
  4. Star Captain
  5. Nova Commander
  6. Star Commander
  7. Point Commander
  8. Squad Commander
  9. (rank unspecified)

Thanks in advance! — The preceding unsigned comment was posted by 75.23.228.139 (talkcontribs) . 23:50, 23 September 2022 (EDT)

Hey,
I would say that naval officers are only equivalent in theory given the BTUs bias toward Land forces. We can fairly safely rank Star Admiral and Star Commodore as secondary.
Placing unspecified at the bottom seemed like a fairly intuitive solution to the issue, If you have another idea I am open to hearing it.--Dmon (talk) 08:28, 24 September 2022 (EDT)
Thanks for the response.
A possible solution I was thinking of to adddress number 1 and number 2, we could actually treat the ranks as being equal, because it's the warriors' names of the same rank that actually determine the sort order.
Given that Galaxy Commanders A and H, Star Admirals B and I, Star Commodores F and M, and Star Colonels G and O all belong to the same Bloodhouse (and all are bloodnamed).
Example of possible solution:
  • Galaxy Commander A
  • Star Admiral B
  • Galaxy Commander H
  • Star Admiral H
  • Star Commodore F
  • Star Colonel G
  • Star Commodore M
  • Star Colonel O
However, the intuitive solution of giving ground pounder ranks priority over naval ranks looks pretty cool to me.
  • Galaxy Commander A
  • Galaxy Commander H
  • Star Admiral B
  • Star Admiral H
  • Star Colonel G
  • Star Colonel O
  • Star Commodore F
  • Star Commodore M
I don't have a preference either way, I just wanted to make sure I was in alignment with Sarna's policies, until I realized there was no policy in place 75.23.228.139 13:42, 24 September 2022 (EDT)
Hi Dmon,
Followup question alpha: Since there isn't a Bloodhouse template, maybe we can move this discussion over to Style Policy, since it involves how rank precedence is listed (which could have applications other than Bloodhouse articles)?
Followup question beta: I just did a somewhat comprehensive search for all references of "Star Commodore" and "Star Admiral" in bloodname articles, and it looks like there isn't a consensus for the precedence. Please let me know what the precedence actually is, and I'd be more than happy to start perusing the Bloodhouse articles to make sure they conform to Sarna policy. 75.23.228.139 14:14, 25 September 2022 (EDT)
Hey 75.23.228.139,
Seeing both methods laidout I think the option of ground pounder ranks priority over naval ranks visually looks nicer so lets go with that. I will see if I have the time to write a policy expansion at some point this week.--Dmon (talk) 17:56, 26 September 2022 (EDT)


Scorpion Empire updates[edit]

Hi Dmon,

I don't know if I'm replying properly here, this message system is something different so I apologize in advance if I screwed up anything

Thanks for nice words and for fixing my stuff, English ain't my first language so any longer text I type won't sound too professional

I can add citations (references, right?) to infobox no problem

I am about to add last segment to article about population so that would cover the whole thing (I used article about Lyran Commonwealth as a general template), after that I'll be doing tiny tweaks if I see anything and adding extra references over time

I have the date for moving capital to Braunschweig, in 'Moving Forward' they say: He had coordinated the move of the capital in 3148

I'll add it to the box as well

Let me know if anything else comes up

Thanks again!

--Warhawk14 (talk) --Warhawk14 (talk) 16:41, 5 October 2022 (EDT)

Companies vs. Corporations[edit]

Dmon, I've noticed you and at least one editor repeatedly changing category links from company to corporation and back again. Is there a reason why corporation is preferred?

All corporations are companies but not all companies are corporations, yet I can understand wanting to avoid confusion with military units. Madness Divine (talk) 12:26, 15 October 2022 (EDT)

Mostly to further seperate the terminology from the military side but I do hope it will increase the visability of the categories. I am thinking that the common "mega-corporation" trope in a lot of sci-fi universes means that most users will find the "corporation" term acceptable despite it not always being 100% accurate.--Dmon (talk) 09:25, 16 October 2022 (EDT)
Have we ever finished that discussion about how other organisations tie into this, eg. the New Avalon Catholic Church or the BranthKeepers? I recall that we sought a catchall category for these a year or two ago... did we ever find one? Frabby (talk) 11:36, 16 October 2022 (EDT)
I do not think we ever finished that conversation, but I am about 6 months behind where I thought I would be at the moment so not a lot has been done on the subject.--Dmon (talk) 12:04, 16 October 2022 (EDT)
Hmm. Maybe use "Commercial Enterprises" and "Non-commercial organisations"? Frabby (talk) 00:21, 17 October 2022 (EDT)
Btw, do you recall where we discussed this before? I remember it but can’t seem to find the discussion. Frabby (talk) 00:25, 17 October 2022 (EDT)
I think it was on Discord, maybe the suggestions tab. I don't really like "Commercial Enterprises" and "Non-commercial organisations", both of those terms kinda feel like bureaucratic non-terms of questionable value to the average wiki user. I want terms users will be able to easily grasp a rough idea of what it is without even clicking on it, hence the switch to corporations despite it not being exactly accurate.
NACC is firmly a religious organisation, where as the Branthkeepers I think I pegged them as a "Political group" in our last discussion but reading the article they are likely a "humane society", but again, that term is not something I really want as a category.--Dmon (talk) 12:45, 17 October 2022 (EDT)

Double Down article revert (pipe/italicized model number)[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Was curious why my edit on Double Down of changing Commando|COM-2D Commando to Commando was reverted?

The article for Commando already has the model number of COM-2D, so it seemed unnecessary to have that pipe. Also, I haven't seen any 'Mech with a model number for novel BattleTech lists on sarna.

Is this a new policy that all 'Mechs on novel BattleTech lists should now have model numbers?

If so, the above reversion is still not correct, per Help:Italics, model numbers should not be italicized. Would the correct reversion have been (Commando|COM-2D Commando to COM-2D <link to commando article>)?

Thanks!

75.23.228.139 18:52, 18 October 2022 (EDT)

I've changed it to match the MOS for 'Mech designators. I assume the particular variant of a 'Mech is name when it's known. Madness Divine (talk) 21:37, 18 October 2022 (EDT)
Sorry about the late reply, been a busy week. The vast majority of the fiction does not specifically name 'Mech variants, but when it does it has been traditional to put it in as a pipe. I do not think it is in the official guidelines, nor am I even sure of the origins of the practice. It has been the way of things for pretty much the entire time I have worked here.--Dmon (talk) 19:06, 20 October 2022 (EDT)

Additional Bloodname article template questions[edit]

Apologies about additional Bloodname article questions, but since there is no Bloodname article template, and since the Policy pages seem to be mum on the topic of how Bloodname members are recommended to be listed, you seem to be the best source to ask them.

Question 1: I've seen articles that list members in the form of "Star Recruit Alpha of Clan Backwater" and also "Star Private Bravo from Clan Whack-a-mole". Which form is recommended, "of" or "from"?

Question 1 recommendation: I prefer "of", but I defer to your recommendation.

Question 2: I've seen certain articles that list the previous ranks of members in the form of "Star Marshal Charlie, previously Star Brigadier" Are there any recommendations on whether previous rank should be included in Bloodname member lists?

Question 2 recommendation: Just like the rank field of infoboxes, I prefer only that the highest rank be listed in Bloodname member lists, rather than potentially every rank the warrior has canonically achieved. If a reader is really interested in the warrior's rank progression, that's what the warrior's article is for. Moreover, including every previous rank that a member has achieved could make the Bloodname member list entry too long to be useful, especially for high ranking Clanners that have actually held numerous ranks in their career. Again, I defer to your recommendation.

Question 3: I've seen articles that list the previous affiliation of members in the "Star Midshipman Delta of Clan Snipe in Exile, previously of Clan Snipe" or "Star Cadet Echo of Clan Snoopy, abtakha of the Inner Dodecahedron". Are there any recommendations on whether previous affiliation should be included in Bloodname member lists?

Question 3 recommendation: My preference is to just go with the warrior's last known affiliation, rather than attempt to track warrior affiliation change on the Bloodname member list for similiar reasons as Question 2 recommendation: trying to track every Bloodhouse member's affiliation change in the member list seems like an inappropriate use of the member list. If a reader is really interested in the warrior's affiliation change, that's what the warrior's article is for. If we were to use the Bloodname member list to track affiliation change, then we'd have to edit every entry that has "Clan Wolf-in-Exile" at the end of the Refusal War to have "previously of Clan Wolf" and every entry that has "Clan Stone Lion" at the time of its formation to have "previously of Clan Hell's Horses", etc.

75.23.228.139 00:22, 20 October 2022 (EDT)

All three of your recommendations are in line with how I would handle the issues.--Dmon (talk) 19:14, 20 October 2022 (EDT)

Delete pages 2022 III[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Can you delete these pages:

For sure there are more, these ones are the ones I found out.--Pserratv (talk) 12:35, 22 October 2022 (EDT)

Done--Dmon (talk) 12:39, 22 October 2022 (EDT)
Found more:

Whatever I find today I'll put here :)--Pserratv (talk) 12:55, 22 October 2022 (EDT)

Rules[edit]

Why'd you delete the rules section for Sponson Turrets? — The preceding unsigned comment was posted by Energo17 (talkcontribs) .

Hey Energo17,
My apologies, I meant to put a comment on your talk page but I got distracted and then forgot. The reason I deleted it is because the wiki is going "rules free" in an attempt to reduce the possability of us getting a Cease and desist order from the owners of the IP. Lore can be rephrased but rules can't really be rephrased and remain correct. Due to real life stuff I have not really had the time to start thi mammoth task thinning out the of rules already on the wiki, but I can try and keep on top of new rules being added for now.--Dmon (talk) 13:43, 31 October 2022 (EDT)

Delete pages 2022 IV[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Found this one too to be deleted: [[Category:Works by Jordan Cuffee]] --Pserratv (talk) 05:24, 26 November 2022 (EST)