User talk:Dude RB


Welcome, Dude RB, to BattleTechWiki!

We look forward to your contributions and want to help you get off to a good strong start. Hopefully you will soon join the army of BattleTech Editors! If you need help formatting the pages, visit the manual of style. For general questions go to the Help section or the FAQ. If you can't find your answer there, please ask an Admin.

Additional tips
Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the wiki:

  • For policies and guidelines, see The Five Core Policies of BattleTechWiki and the BTW Policies. Another good place to check out is our market of Projects, to see how the smaller communities within BTW do things in their particular niche areas.
  • Each and every page (articles, policies, projects, images, etc.) has its very own discussion/talk page, found on the tab line at the top of the page. This is a great place to find out what the community is discussing along that subject and what previous issues have already been solved.
  • If you want to play around with your new wiki skills, the Sandbox is for you. Don't worry: you won't break anything. A great resource for printing out is the Wiki Cheat Sheet.
  • If you're not registered, then please consider doing so. At the very least, you'll have a UserPage that you own, rather than sharing one with the community.
  • Also consider writing something about yourself on your UserPage (marked as "Dude RB" at the top of the page, though only do this if you're registered). You'll go from being a 'redshirt' to a 'blueshirt,' with the respect of a more permanent member.
    • This is really helpful for the admins, as it gives your account that touch of "humanity" that assists us in our never-ending battle with spambots.
  • For your first few edits on the wiki, please do not add any URLs (which can be an indicator of SPAM).
  • Consider introducing yourself on our Discord server.
  • In your Preferences, under the edit tab, consider checking Add pages I create to my watchlist and Add pages I edit to my watchlist, so that you can see how your efforts have affected the community. Check back on following visits by clicking on watchlist.
  • If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random button in the sidebar, or check out the List of Wanted Pages. Or even go to Special Pages to see what weird stuff is actually tracked by this wiki.
  • Please sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the circled button in this image; this will automatically produce your name (or IP address, if you are editing anonymously) and the date.

Again, welcome to Sarna's BattleTechWiki!

*******Be Bold*******

-- New user message (talk) 00:07, 30 October 2020 (EDT)

Editor and Admin Awards[edit]

Dude RB, Editors contributing to Sarna typically fall into three categories: single-digit Editors, Site-wide editors, & Focused Interest Editors. They are all valued equally, for each brings a much needed level of attention to issues throughout the overall project. However, every now and then, the efforts of the third type of Editors catch my eye, for they add something that was either sorely neglected or altogether missing. Your focus on beefing up the tracking of the individual issues of miniatures is equal to that of any other type of BattleTech product reported on here and you've certainly added tremendous value to Sarna for your efforts.

I normally don't grant multiple serial awards, but your scope of articles (Miniatures - Catalyst Game Labs, Miniatures - Ral Partha, and Ral Partha Catalogs) each deserve the Admin level Good Article Award for their comprehensive details. (It should be noted you also started Miniatures - FASA, but I suspect that article just doesn't have much more information for you to inject.) As a fellow Editor, I'm also awarding you the Substantial Addition Award for your work improving List of Miniatures.

Finally, I'd like to also recognize your six+ months of Time In Service since you started here. This ribbon, much like the Edit Count Award, can be updated by yourself, as you meet the milestones. I've taken the liberty of adding the ribbons to your User Page ribbon board.

Thank you for your efforts, Dude RB.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 14:31, 9 May 2021 (EDT)

Boxed Sets[edit]

Hiya, just wanted to let you know that I am super happy about what you did to the BattleTech boxed set article. Thank you! Frabby (talk) 03:46, 7 June 2021 (EDT)

You're welcome. Thanks for creating the page in the first place. Given the multitude of boxed sets, having a central page showing them all is quite helpful. --Dude RB (talk) 09:21, 7 June 2021 (EDT)
Just have to repeat my praise there: Thanks for your support on this front. And yes, I used copyright year dates where I couldn't be sure of publication dates. Your research efforts correcting my false assumptinos are very helpful! I think the award system on Sarna is practically dead, but you definitely deserve one: Substantial Addition Award, 2nd ribbon Frabby (talk) 07:35, 5 March 2023 (EST)
Thanks for the note of appreciation. I know that a second set of eyes is useful. Glad to help out. --Dude RB (talk) 13:20, 5 March 2023 (EST)


Revanche recommended working with you on this. Looks like we need to rename and recategorize the new Lance/Star packs. Currently "BattleTech: Inner Sphere XXX Lance" but should actually be "BattleTech: ForcePack: Inner Sphere XXX Lance" Same for the Clan ones. Plus divorcing the ForcePacks from the Lance Packs would add some clarity to the categories.

Thoughts?MahiMahi (talk) 23:27, 20 June 2021 (EDT)

Thanks for reaching out. I would be glad to assist and add another perspective with this. I saw your addition of a series page for Alpha Strike Lance Packs and your updating of the series info in those products. I think that the addition of a series page (and using the series info) is a good idea and it will definitely help grouping. It seems to me best to think of all of the Clan KickStarter Force Packs as one series. [Dividing into three series: Lance Packs, Star Packs, and Division II Packs is another passing thought, but that does not seem to be the best for defining a series.] In terms of Series Name how about simply `BattleTech Force Packs'. Please let me know your thoughts on this.
In terms of the article name for each product, it would be ideal to keep the name identical or close to the name of product advertised commercially, but I also understand the desire to make the article names easy to distinguish. For the product "BattleTech: Inner Sphere Battle Lance" I could see the following article names as reasonable.
  • BattleTech: Inner Sphere Battle Lance
  • BattleTech: Inner Sphere Battle Lance Force Pack
  • Force Pack: Inner Sphere Battle Lance
I currently favor the third one (Force Pack: Inner Sphere Battle Lance) for the following reasons. When sorting alphabetically, a prefix (rather than a suffix) would cause grouping automatically. Also BattleTech is an implicitly assumed prefix for most things on this site, so omitting it is no real info loss. Also the "Force Pack:" prefix stands out more than something beginning with a 'B'. FYI: This is also the label used within the Clan Kickstarter. Let me know if this approach seems good to you. --Dude RB (talk) 23:42, 20 June 2021 (EDT)
I also favor the third. A single series/category of ForcePacks would look cleaner, and the series page could further divide those by the three factional groups, possibly including subcategories. I also propose the series be ordered by product code, there seems to be consistency there and I hope Wave 2 will continue it. MahiMahi (talk) 23:57, 20 June 2021 (EDT)
Also category tags can used to differentiate between lance packs, star packs, and division II packs. Showing such on the series page would be appropriate too. Depending on how one wished to express what is part of Wave I and Wave II, the organization of the series page could potentially vary. Category tags would definitely be something that would help regardless of the final series page organization. In terms of sequencing, if all the wave 2 catalog codes numerically succeed the wave 1 catalog codes, then I think that ordering the `preceded by' and 'followed by' links according to catalog codes would be good. Wave 1 was released in one batch, so ordering by catalog code within that wave is sensible, and the same can be done for wave 2. But wave 1 force packs should precede wave 2 force packs. So hopefully the catalog code sequence continues and there are no tough decisions. --Dude RB (talk) 00:27, 21 June 2021 (EDT)
My only concern with this is that the packaging of the product does not appear to use the words "ForcePack" that I can see (I put all mine into second wave so I am just going of the promo pics). Right now a lot of people know about the Kickstarter, but say a complete noobie who picks one up in a store or somebody who sees one on ebay ten years from now is going to go off the box.--Dmon (talk) 00:12, 21 June 2021 (EDT)
Wouldn't a redirect solve that? Aside from brand labeling the box says only "Inner Sphere Command Lance"MahiMahi (talk) 00:17, 21 June 2021 (EDT)
Yes a redirect would solve that, but I favor keeping the name printed on the physical product over a name on the CGL store, that can be changed at any time, as the main name we use--Dmon (talk) 00:20, 21 June 2021 (EDT)
We should report the product name as commercially stated, which is "BattleTech: Inner Sphere Battle Lance" or "BattleTech Inner Sphere Battle Lance". But can we name the article itself "Force Pack: Inner Sphere Battle Lance"? --Dude RB (talk) 00:29, 21 June 2021 (EDT)
I have 3 of the 4 wave 1 force packs. The promo picture is an accurate representation of the text on the front. It also appears on both sides, the top, and the bottom. So we should definitely label the product appropriately within the article and the article's product info box, but the article name could be slightly different, correct? --Dude RB (talk) 00:32, 21 June 2021 (EDT)
I long since threw my boxes away, but the BattleTech isn't part of the title anymore than it is in Total Warfare. ForcePack could remain the series title with individual product articles being labeled as the orange text reads. My main objective is to separate them from the Alpha Strike Lance Packs and the Iron Wind Lance sets. MahiMahi (talk) 00:45, 21 June 2021 (EDT)
Further grist for the mill: Catalyst Game Labs labels it on its own website as "BattleTech: ForcePack: Inner Sphere Command Lance". And most retailers also incorporate 'Force Pack' in some form into the entry name (but these vary and retailer namings do not admittedly count as official). The ForcePack terminology was also used in the KickStarter forms too. Dmon, while it is possible that Catalyst could change their naming, I think that their webstore would count as an official reflection of naming within their own catalog. So I don't see an issue with using "ForcePack: Inner Sphere Command Lance" as the product name in the product infobox. (This is identifying it as the 'Inner Sphere Command Lance' within the 'BattleTech ForcePack' series. In terms of searchability based on packaging, it will be important to retain the phrase `Inner Sphere Command Lance', but I don't think that that point is in doubt here.
One small issue is the space between Force and Pack (is there one space or no space?). Catalyst (both in its Webstore and in the Kickstarter) seems to be using no space between Force and Pack. (So it sounds that I will have to resist the natural urge to insert a space.) Making naming conventions consistent regarding that would be important. --Dude RB (talk) 06:25, 21 June 2021 (EDT)
Dmon and MahiMahi, this is definitely fruitful discussion and something that benefits from some rumination. In terms of the product name, since the current product article titles and product info box names are reasonable, I think that it is fine to leave those as the working titles for the time being. As further information from Catalyst becomes more manifest, the product name is something that can be revisited. [I find it a bit odd that Catalyst has only posted two of the force packs on their site.] As Catalyst pivots these products from KickStarter to retail (and updates some form of catalog), we may get further information that help guide us.
I think that a Series page and using the Series info fields can help distinguish these from the prior Alpha Strike Lance Packs. Of course, it would be good to hammer out the series name. In terms of a Series Name, it comes to mind that "Clan Invasion Force Pack" or "Clan Invasion ForcePack" seems suitable. This helps make the association to the Clan Invasion Box Set and Clan Invasion Kickstarter clear. I am not certain how permanent the `ForcePack' designation (with no space) will be as a coined term. But `Force Pack' (with a space) would work as a generic term, so that may be the safer option, at least to start. Please share your thoughts regarding the name "Clan Invasion Force Pack" to describe this series of products. --Dude RB (talk) 08:39, 23 June 2021 (EDT)

WebArchive Notes[edit]

I just came across your WebArchive Notes article and was impresse., After reading thru it (and going down a rabbit hole of old pages), I really think this would serve as a great guide for more advanced research editors here on Sarna. With your permission, I'd like to put it under the Essays category and put it on the Main Page rotation.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 06:39, 22 June 2021 (EDT)

Thanks for your note and feedback. That is helpful to hear. You have my permission to use such in the manner you have proposed. I just went through and tidied up a few things with a fresh set of eyes. So it should be reasonably ready to roll. Its intent is to share information and lessons learned. It should hopefully put certain bits of institutional knowledge into a readably available intro, particularly for those who may find web-historical research relevant. If someone should feel inclined to refine or expand either half, that is perfectly fine by me too. Best, --Dude RB (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2021 (EDT)

BattleTech MapPack[edit]

I think it's safe to remove "BattleTech" from the names of the older MapPacks, like BattleTech MapPack: Flatlands Terrain Set. The new Map Packs have "BattleTech" on the covers, but not in the title. There are a lot of products that do so as well.--Cache (talk) 21:47, 22 September 2021 (EDT)

Thanks for your note Cache. "To include the BattleTech prefix, or to not include, that is the question".
It is not clear whether or not BattleTech is part of the official title for these MapPacks from 2013. (FYI: Like the cover, the intro paragraphs in the pdfs themselves leave some ambiguity as to whether BattleTech is part of the title.) Removing the BattleTech prefix would leave a meaningful "MapPack" prefix, so I don't see any practical issue in leaving `BattleTech' out from the product page name. But it does leave an open question as to the official title of the product itself.
I was making the two multi-map MapPacks (e.g. MapPack: Flatlands Terrain Set, which lacked the BT prefix) consistent with the thirteen single map MapPacks (e.g. BattleTech MapPack: BattleForce which had the BT prefix). I am open to the conversion occurring in the other direction. Consistency between the two would be my main desire. --Dude RB (talk) 23:05, 22 September 2021 (EDT)

MechWarrior Sets[edit]

Hey Dude,

Usually I have no issue with your work so trnd to leave you to it.. But I am not entierly sure of the rational behind moving stuff from individual product pages to MechWarrior Sets, to me it seems like a step backwards. So... What is the grand plan?--Dmon (talk) 05:16, 1 November 2021 (EDT)

Hello Dmon. Thanks for your note. I will outline the plan below (but there is also some creative questions that are still open). I have reversed the changeds to MechWarrior: Dark Age Starter Set as I realize that I should complete stage one (which will take some time) before attempting to integrate those results back into the starter sets and booster pack pages.
The motivation is that I noticed two issues with the starter set and booster packs. 1) The collection lists are quite incomplete and 2) the images use the collection icon (which is quite low-res). An example of both of these can be found by looking at MechWarrior: Fire For Effect. The easier one to fix is item 2. For that I plan to swap in product images when I can and move the collection icon to separate part of the article, but in a thumbnail sized suitable to its resolution.
For item 1, I am working on developing a comprehensive list that shows the collection for each set with a uniform format for each. This is the motivation for MechWarrior Sets. But it will take some time to complete that page. Once that page is completed, I am contemplating one of the following possible directions.
a) In each product page (starter set or booster pack) simply replace the collection section with a brief reference/link to the corresponding section in the comprehensive list page MechWarrior Sets,
b) Copy the portions of the comprehensive list page into the respective collection section of each product page (starter set or booster pack) (and leave the comprehensive list page as a way to view the collections of all sets in one page), or
c) Copy the portions of the comprehensive list page into the respective collection section of each product page (starter set or booster pack) and make the comprehensive list page into something more detailed, for instance a table showing the details/stats of each figure. (For example, this would mean replacing the summary line "Peasant Company (3 figures)" with details/stats for all three figures.)
Option b would lead to duplicate lists which would seem problematic for various reasons. So options a and c are the frontrunners in my opinion. But all three start with the common first stage of what is being crafted in MechWarrior Sets.
So this is the current plan of action. Input is definitely welcome. --Dude RB (talk) 18:11, 1 November 2021 (EDT)

Camo Specs Online[edit]

Thanks for adding to Camo Specs Online. As I have said elsewhere: it's a topic I actually have very little knowledge or interest in, but I had to make it to get a couple pages, including a Real Person, out of the Orphanage. I decided earlier to remove the stub tag I had put on it, and...well, suddenly folk are interested. Great! You seem to be one of the folk with a serious interest in the topic: any chance you could turn that into a not-stub? I will no longer be maintaining it, I am already well past my limit of competence on the topic.--Talvin (talk) 17:07, 20 March 2022 (EDT)

Hello Talvin. I can put this on my radar. My available time to apply to it may be a bit limited for the near future, so work may be incremental or slow. If there is anyone who is eager to tackle this with gusto, please do not hold them back, but I will put it on my "slow-burn" radar/queue. --Dude RB (talk) 22:00, 20 March 2022 (EDT)
Thanks! --Talvin (talk) 10:03, 21 March 2022 (EDT)

I see all the work you have been putting in on this. Have a shiny!
Assistance Appreciated Award, 1st ribbon
--Talvin (talk) 13:42, 26 March 2022 (EDT)

Delta Vision[edit]

I took a stab at doing a brief page for Delta Vision, the ones who publish the Hungarian editions, but the only website I found for them is not responding. deltavision DOT hu. If you happen across another, let me know?--Talvin (talk) 15:45, 21 May 2022 (EDT)

Talvin, I know what you mean about their offical page appearing to be down. A page I found helpful was the Delta Vision page in the Hungarian Wikipedia. I also think that they have a Facebook page, but this page seems less than ideal for certain purposes.
FYI: Beholder, the other company that produces Hungarian editions, has a good website They also sell books published by Delta Vision, In fact, it seemed possible that Delta Vision might be branch of Beholder, but the wiki article makes it clear that it is a separate entity. --Dude RB (talk) 16:04, 21 May 2022 (EDT)
Thanks. I may do a feeble attempt at a page for them, just because I want people to be able to find the stuff in their preferred language (plus some collectors grab any edition they can find.)--Talvin (talk) 16:07, 21 May 2022 (EDT)
Talvin, that sounds like a good idea. Please feel free to create a publisher page for Delta Vision (and also Beholder if you feel inclined). FYI: I have a trove of book cover images that I will be uploading soon. Also I have a compiled table of the Hungarian BattleTech and MechWarrior novels that I plan to develop into a page called List of BattleTech Print Novels in Hungarian that will essentially be a Hungarian version of List of BattleTech Print Novels in Spanish. But these will focus on the books themselves. Pages geared towards the publishers themselves would complement that nicely. --Dude RB (talk) 16:55, 21 May 2022 (EDT)
I'll put it on my list. Thanks!--Talvin (talk) 16:57, 21 May 2022 (EDT)

More Spanish Editions![edit]

Hey DudeRB! I was just getting started on an attempt at pages for the foreign-language publishers when I stumbled across The page shown appears to have Cranston Snord's Irregulars and Sorenson's Sabres in Spanish. Thought I would bring this to your attention since you are handling some of the foreign-language stuff.--Talvin (talk) 13:03, 1 June 2022 (EDT)

Diseños Orbitales. I am going to let that sit for a bit, see what feedback I get before I do any others. This is something fairly new, and I want to give people a chance to suggest changes in format and such before I start the next one.--Talvin (talk) 13:56, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
Talvin, thanks for the new lead. I will give it a look over and see what additional goodies (and search terms) it may reveal.
The new publisher page Diseños Orbitales looks good. It is succinct and self contained. (And quite key is that it has some good references and bibliography). It is a good foundation for additonal info as such gets discovered. Thanks for creating it. Letting it sit will not only give a chance to get feedback from others, but also give you a chance to develop your own reflections.
FYI: In perusing the Wikipedia page, it appears that they had a hand in publishing Troll, which is a magazine I have seen mentioned on Sarna, but for which my knowledge is quite limited. These are the sort of connections that it will gradually accumulate.
Side note: I don't know if this is helpful, but I have discovered that Microsoft Edge has been a bit more helpful for handling page translations than Google Chrome (namely Edge will identify more pages as translatable than does Chrome). I am not sure what set up you are using for translation, but experimenting with different browsers can sometimes open new options. --Dude RB (talk) 18:31, 1 June 2022 (EDT)
Mac. :) I just plug the URLs into Google Translate when I need to.--Talvin (talk) 18:33, 1 June 2022 (EDT)

More Japanese Editions[edit]

Category talk:Japanese Editions--Talvin (talk) 13:26, 7 July 2022 (EDT)

Thanks for the leads. I have done some cursory searching and found a few cover images, but I will have to dive deeper. Some of the cover images cause me to wonder how trademarked the name BattleTech is in Japan. For instance, see for one that is quite amusing but whose connection to BattleTech (at least the BattleTech for this wiki) is a bit unclear. --Dude RB (talk) 19:57, 7 July 2022 (EDT)
The cover for the Gray Death Legion that I found is also very "Manga", so I don't know. And as I joked in the page linked above: which BattleTech Novel does that title describe? So many! ;) --Talvin (talk) 20:00, 7 July 2022 (EDT)
I did find the following at Amazon. While having a manga vibe, this set of covers at least involves stompy robots. --Dude RB (talk) 20:21, 7 July 2022 (EDT)
Looks like Gray Death Legion. Did they do a Manga based on it? Or just split each book into two parts? I will do some more digging. Interesting stuff.--Talvin (talk) 20:45, 7 July 2022 (EDT)
For the first, the cover says Decision at Thunder Rift in the lower right hand corner. So definitely a connection to Gray Death Legion. Also they appear to have BattleTech in BattleTech font. --Dude RB (talk) 21:52, 7 July 2022 (EDT)

RL Orgs Infobox[edit]

Starting something here, and as you deal with RL Organizations/Corporations (IronWind comes immediately to mind), I would welcome your input especially. Talk:Diseños Orbitales. If you look at what I have and the previous version side by side, having the Infobox really does make a difference.--Talvin (talk) 10:47, 12 July 2022 (EDT)

Thanks for the note. I have added some input. --Dude RB (talk) 21:50, 12 July 2022 (EDT)