User talk:Frabby

Archive 1 (created 04 January 2012)
Archive 2 (created 01 January 2013)
Archive 3 (created 03 January 2014)
Archive 4 (created 04 January 2018)
Archive 5 (created 07 January 2021)

Feel free to leave a message. :)

As of 07 Jan 2021, I archived all content on my talk page because I reckon there were no pending issues.

The Nellus Academy Incident[edit]

Hi Frabby,
Have you read The Nellus Academy Incident? I've just finished reading it, and there are a few details in it that are making the canon-processing part of my brain itch a little. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 16:49, 9 January 2021 (EST)

Read it via BattleCorps; I also have the PoD standing on my shelf. Was going to produce a proper article, but since it ultimately seems like a side story of little relevance it got pushed back. I think I know what itches your brain though. :) Frabby (talk) 01:33, 10 January 2021 (EST)
I'm going to keep reading the author's books - it was a good YA SF read - but I singled out three things that felt anachronistic to me: sending messages to and from Nestor via the jump point of somewhere near Gienah without an HPG, the presence of a COM-2Dr Commando which is a Jihad-era refit according to TRO-3085 in a novel set in 3067 (with it being a well-known enough variant for FWL cadets to recognise) and the ending section where the four-hundred thousand tonne Monolith class JumpShip was accompanied by WarShips "more than twice its mass" which at the time, can only be the Fylgia and Yggdrasil, which seemed a bit of a stretch... I'd been thinking of trying to write up the summary for the webpage, but I'm not sure how to reconcile novels being the highest level of canon with these odd details. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 03:13, 10 January 2021 (EST)

Fortune Charlie[edit]

Hi Frabby, I have not re-read the books, but from what you say, I nevertheless thing temporarily we should keep the information there and link to Operation CERBERUS once done, otherwise this piece of lore would be easily forgotten (at least for me).--Pserratv (talk) 07:21, 12 January 2021 (EST)

Cerberus and its sub-commands is covered in quite some depth in the novella A Splinter of Hope. If and when I get around to doing an article on Cerberus, Task Force Styx and Fortune Charlie within it will likely feature rather prominently. But I firmly believe Fortune Charlie should only be a redirect to the proper operation that it was a small part of. Calling Fortune Charlie a unit is at least misleading if not outright false, and as such I felt I couldn't just leave it there. Frabby (talk) 04:57, 13 January 2021 (EST)
I read it yesterday, and it is true what you say. As members of "Fortune Charlie", only one unit is spoken by name, the others are considered an assorted mix of units, like Jihad era conglomerate of small mercenary commands by Devlin Stone.
Once you have full article though, we should redirect this page to the section that specifically explains what "Fortune Charlie" represents.--Pserratv (talk) 05:22, 13 January 2021 (EST)

Emblematic Mech[edit]

Hello I finally take the time to write the Essay: Emblematic 'Mechs like you advise me to do almost a month ago (I had a lot of works before :(). I don't really feel like it's a true essay. I just extracted and centralized information dispersed in other articles, without putting thought or arguments. After, I have no idea if there is a better way to categorize it and you have far more knowledge on that than I. I would be very grateful if you can look at it and tell me what you think of it. Dermenore (talk) 16:48, 21 January 2021 (EST)

Images for individual starships[edit]

Hiya, I wanted to ask you to refrain from putting generic ship class images into articles about individual vessels, like in the Full Moon article. There is a less than 1% chance that this image is actually showing the Full Moon out of the 106 Potemkins ever built. Please only use images that are confirmed, or at least reasonably likely, to depict the specific vessel in question. I feel using generic images is like putting a regular Centurion image into the infobox of the Yen-Lo-Wang article just because Yen-Lo-Wang is a Centurion. If there is no picture for a specific starship then so be it. Frabby (talk) 15:07, 31 January 2021 (EST)

Frappy, do you know the long ODDS of individual Warship picture to be created? Likelness is 1% it will ever be made. That's crazy Frabby. Unless something special is made, i think that sort policy is bit going too far. --Wrangler (talk) 19:36, 4 February 2021 (EST)
I'm afraid this where we have to "Agree, to disagree". This a Warship, not a person with thinking mind or a unique one-off vessel. You can't capture EVERYTHING. I think your being too specific. This my personal view. Specially with BattleTech, Warships are least love units aside from ProtoMechs by some element of our fandom/gamedom. Warship is a Warship unless it's a variant. Frabby, the thing is that Full Moon, is a Clan 3057 version. Technical Readout: 3057 Revised spells it out that Clans changed their ships in this specific case. Mk39 looks like old Vincent from 2750. That's been established. Yet there now 2 kinds of McKennas. Completely different, like much of 2750 ships such as with Aegis specially, but again. 3057 Revised spell out which one is which when it happened. I think your going too far with this. Mjolnir for instance looks same as the sister ship. There no individual pictures of now destroyed second ship. As again, i think your being too picky. I say again, "Agree, to disagree". Your one main editors now here, i'm just some body who helps out since i can't complete in editing and my work isn't as close to people who those who here daily. What you say goes, i personally thing your going too far on dead end subject. I will do as you say, i think your in wrong this. I don't want be banned. -- Wrangler (talk) 15:44, 6 February 2021 (EST)

Developer Insights[edit]

I read a post on the official forum that had great insight into the changes to the Tukayyid "C" 'Mech record sheets. I feel like that would be great information to archive here in some way, but I'm not sure how. A link in the 'Mech article notes might work, but the BT forum are far from permanent. Any ideas or opinions?--Cache (talk) 14:32, 18 February 2021 (EST)

It's probably gonna be important when trying to explain that, and why, the "C" configurations were retconned to what was now established. As a first thought, perhaps copy that post into an Essay type article and link to that in the 'Mech articles whenever a "C" variant is discussed.
In the past I used to archive such information on the pertinent talk page; but this is different as it is not exactly a ruling, and also much longer. So I think it needs to be treated differently. Frabby (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2021 (EST)
I like the "essay" idea. I have PM'd the author for permission to copy.--Cache (talk) 19:51, 18 February 2021 (EST)

Sam Lewis in Wolves on the Border[edit]

Hey Frabby,

I have just done a search in my ebook copy of Wolves on the Border for Sam Lewis. I can't find any mention of him in the book.--Dmon (talk) 09:18, 4 March 2021 (EST)

Checked my print books, and ayup, you're right: It's one Prof. McGuffin (!!) who was mentioned along Dr. Banzai for the Jump Stabilizer. Seems I plainly misremembered. The reference to Professor-General Sam Lewis was in Warrior: Coupe instead, according to his article here. Might as well have looked there first. Frabby (talk) 11:00, 4 March 2021 (EST)

Image Categories[edit]

Hi Frabby,

Do you know how the system maps are generated? All those images don't have a category and this makes the Uncategorized files not very useful as from the first 1000 thousand maybe 95% images as these ones. And I do not want to put them in a category as this might affect the "program" that generates them. Do you know who can help? Maybe when the image is generated it can be put in a category like "System Images". I'm asking more people, but do you have any idea?--Pserratv (talk) 04:22, 8 March 2021 (EST)

Adding Design Programs in Left Menu[edit]

Do you think is worth adding a direct link the the design softwares? The pages I've been adding: Category:Battletech Design Software.--Pserratv (talk) 05:12, 22 March 2021 (EDT)

Board Game[edit]

Afternoon, Frabby. IRT Board Game, I'm not sure what to make of this page. It seems to attract the attention of multiple Editors, but...what is it saying? I'm thinking of categorizing it as either Lists or Miscellaneous, but...I just don't get it. Advise, please. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 12:38, 9 May 2021 (EDT)

It's funny that you raise this just now. I've had to take a short wikibreak of sorts and taking that step back made me realize there's a laundry list of admin-level issues on Sarna that needs to be adressed, or at least is becoming a serious problem from my viewpoint. Presentation, project coordination, category structure, article structures, newbie help, you name it. Artifact articles like this one you mentioned are a small facet of one of the major chapters on this wish list. I was going to discuss this with Nic and the active admins shortly and I'm extremely happy to have you back so expect mail shortly (couple of days probably). :) Frabby (talk) 13:03, 9 May 2021 (EDT)
Roger that, muh-man. I'll hold off on any action until in receipt of your treatise. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 13:20, 9 May 2021 (EDT)


Afternoon, Frabby. Would you please take a look at my attempt to update the Brawler article? I'm specifically asking for a review of the general completeness of the role's description and the (hopefully) fair-use presentation of the Alpha Strike description. If/when it is acceptable, I'm intending to update/build the remaining unit role articles, including for the ASFs. Thanks. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 15:26, 15 May 2021 (EDT)

Unfortunately I've never played Alpha Strike, never even completely read the AS rulebook. I'm totally in the dark about that game system. Frabby (talk) 03:07, 18 June 2021 (EDT)

Longbow Note[edit]

Hey Frabby. In the note you left on the Longbow article, it may be worth mentioning that Ral Partha produced the miniature using the Unseen image, in their catalog starting in 1988, which coincides with the appearances in Merc's Handbook and The Star League. --Cache (talk) 11:01, 21 August 2021 (EDT)

That's indeed worth noting. I don't have that catalogue, and didn't know that (I'm really not very much into miniatures). Can you expand the Notes to include this info? Frabby (talk) 11:07, 21 August 2021 (EDT)
I gave it a shot. Hopefully I got the point across while maintaining the flow.--Cache (talk) 11:59, 21 August 2021 (EDT)
Pretty good, thank you. I take it "sku" is part of the product name? In an ideal world we would have an article link here, but miniatures are the stepchild of Sarna and I am in no position to improve the situation. Frabby (talk) 12:16, 21 August 2021 (EDT)
SKU stands for Stock Keeping Unit--the manufacturers stock number for the product. It is listed in the catalog article, there just isn't an easy way to directly link to its exact location. Setting individual anchors is a bit of a task.--Cache (talk) 12:27, 21 August 2021 (EDT)

Four minor points[edit]

(Moved from user page to user talk page)

I can't get the hang of pinging on this wiki, so I came to your page. It's nice to have feedback because my efforts aren't perfect.

  • Re: AeroSpace Fighter, I've been using the Policy:BattleTech Style Guide connected to the Manual of Style, which requires CamelCase. I don't think I have a copy of the BattleCorps MOS.
  • Re: Mad Jumpin Jacks, it was inconsistent within the article so I went with what's at the Phoenix (Mercenary Command) page the unit name redirects to. I don't read German and I don't know if I have a PDF or doc of the novel to check against so I didn't even try to consult the original.
  • Re: Hyphen use in co-founder. I've been going with Fowler ("hyphens are regrettable necessities, and to be done without when they reasonably may") due in part to the over(mis)use of hyphens by CGL. I'm using a dictionary aggregator and the Chicago Manual of Style for hyphenation but I'm bound to get a few wrong.
  • Re: Correcting quotations. I try to consult the original text before correcting quotes but I know I miss some; I'm glad to have my mistakes corrected. I've actually had to correct a few quotes in other articles to match what's in the original product text.

It would have been helpful if FASA/FanPro/CGL had at least tried to be consistent in its own products... Madness Divine (talk)


Hey Frabby. Saw that you removed Moratorium from PseudoTech: Arcade Operations. Please note this is not a Free product. It costs $2.99 in the CGL store and DriveThruRPG.--Talvin (talk) 11:59, 7 April 2022 (EDT)

D'oh. Me sloppy. Thanks for pointing out! Changing back. Frabby (talk) 12:03, 7 April 2022 (EDT)

Some German edition issues[edit]

Frabby. I encountered two issues related to German editions of certain novels. The issues are posted in Talk:List of German BattleTech novels and Talk:Shadows of War. Please feel free to share any insights that may help resolve those. Thanks. --Dude RB (talk) 22:23, 15 June 2022 (EDT)

Just gonna drop this here, as sorta related: Im Schatten der Bestie had some notes added to the Canonicity section about Mech names and mistranslations. I just moved it down to a Notes section and otherwise left it be, but if you get a chance, please take a look? Thanks!--Talvin (talk) 18:01, 17 June 2022 (EDT)

Intermedia X-Pulse Laser[edit]

I just saw that you reverted Intermedia X-Pulse Laser from where I had marked it for deletion. I am rather confused: it is one among a pile of similar redirects that used to point to Fanon, has nothing linking to it, and I can't see why it would need to stay?--Talvin (talk) 08:22, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

I did? Damn. Presumably another case of me hitting the stupid "rollback" button when I was really only trying to scroll down the recent changes on my not-so-smart phone. I hate that button! And this time I didn't even realize I had hit it. Re-deleted. Frabby (talk) 12:58, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
I have never tried to use this site on anything smaller than an iPad. Somebody rolled my userpage back a couple months, once. :D Thanks for fixing.--Talvin (talk) 13:00, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

Astronomical Features[edit]

Frabby, you raised a point about the definition of Category:Astronomical Features back in 2020. I know that idea may have grown dormant since then, but can you elabaorate (in Category talk:Astronomical Features) on the issues you see/recall from then and whether they still need attention now? --Dude RB (talk) 00:03, 5 July 2022 (EDT)

Thanks for the ping. I’ve replied over on the discussion page. Frabby (talk) 12:18, 5 July 2022 (EDT)

Japanese Editions[edit]

I seem to recall you collect foreign editions. I have done more detective work: Category_talk:Japanese_Editions --Talvin (talk) 13:25, 7 July 2022 (EDT)


Glenmora (Individual Trutzburg-class äDropShip)--Talvin (talk) 08:31, 11 July 2022 (EDT)

Oops. Fixed. Frabby (talk) 16:35, 11 July 2022 (EDT)

25th Anniversary Introductory Box Set and BattleTech Einsteigerbox[edit]

Hello Frabby. I saw your removal of the German edition information from 25th Anniversary Introductory Box Set and the note on the edit. I am curious to get your vantage point on this. While the 2012 BattleTech Einsteigerbox did not adopt a German version of the title, it does appears that its cover and the components are a port over of those in the 25th Anniversary Introductory Box Set, using the component list from the archived product page from Ulisses-Spiele.) Some of the contained booklets have page counts off by four, but the descriptions of the maps and the 'Mechs, including the premium 'Mechs, seem to align. Even in the lower right hand corner of the cover File:BattleTech Einsteigerbox-cover.jpg there is a note that reads '25 jahriges jubilaum kampfkollosse des 4 jahrtausends' (trans. 25th anniversary of the battle colossi of the 4th millennium) so it also seems to be acknowledging the 25th anniversary of BattleTech. It would seem proper to classify this as a German version of the 25th Anniversary Introductory Box Set even though the title is vastly different. Is there something that I am missing or overlooking (whether in terms of interpretation or historical context)? An error on my part is quite possible, especially as German is not a language I am fluent in. I would be curious to get a proper understanding one way or the other. --Dude RB (talk) 19:47, 9 January 2023 (EST)

Need to research this a little more. The Anniversary Box and subsequent Introduction Box are very similar, that makes it difficult to decide which (if indeed any particular one) of them the German box is based on. It can't really be both though. Frabby (talk) 11:51, 14 January 2023 (EST)
One thing to note is that there are (at least) two different versions of the BattleTech Einsteigerbox. One released in 2012. And one released in 2014. Ulisses-Spielle calls the latter BattleTech Einsteigerbox (Neuauflage). See BattleTech Einsteigerbox and BattleTech Einsteigerbox (Neuauflage) for a comparison. In fact at the bottom of the web-listing for the older one is a link to the entry for the newer one. --Dude RB (talk) 12:59, 14 January 2023 (EST)

After looking into this I fully agree with you and have re-inserted the German edition parts into the 25th Anniversary Box article. Thanks for calling me out on this mistake. Frabby (talk) 05:55, 19 January 2023 (EST)

Thanks for the update and the independent confirmation. It is definitely good to have another set of eyes to help confirm or correct. --Dude RB (talk) 19:20, 20 January 2023 (EST)

Disambig (cont.)[edit]

Hi Frabby, I'm not sure if you read my last reply in my talk page's Disambig discussion. Have you given any more thought to matter? --Csdavis715 (talk) 09:08, 22 September 2023 (EDT)

Just checking in. As of this moment we are at 1,252 disambig pages and still climbing. I've finished going through all Clan characters and bloodnames currently in the database and have moved on to systems. Deadfire has helped me eliminate several hundred "structural" redirects to improve the search and autocomplete functions. Continuing to add disambig/seeother notes on non-Clan pages as previously discussed. Do you feel things are working and progressing to your satisfaction? Csdavis715 (talk) 07:23, 9 November 2023 (EST)
You're putting much more work into this than I ever did, honestly. I'm totally fine with it. In individual cases I might disagree regarding the disambig/seeother tag at the page header but if and when I run across something and actually find the time to lean into it, I'll ping you. Frabby (talk) 07:52, 9 November 2023 (EST)
Appreciate it. If you feel the wording of the tag can be improved, of course please make whatever adjustments you feel is appropriate. Sometimes it's not always clear and I'm just doing a quick scan of the article for key words to put in. Csdavis715 (talk) 08:06, 9 November 2023 (EST)
Following up on something. Going through the DropShips and WarShips looking for same-named ships, I didn't realize just how many ships were needlessly disambiguated. I didn't count but there's maybe 100? My feelings on this have changed since you first mentioned it last August. Some of them make sense and understandable to leave as is, but if given the opportunity one day I'd be happy to move 90% of them back to their appropriate, simplified links, along with text replacements to rid the wiki of redirects that we don't need, decluttering the search function a little. Csdavis715 (talk) 01:07, 4 March 2024 (EST)
Oh, you're really preaching to the choir here. Apparently, someone got the notion that all ship names should be disambiguated to "name (class, type)". That wasn't my idea and I never liked it. You are very welcome to purge unneccessary redirects and disambiguations! A word of caution though, there are some edge cases where a ship was renamed and one of its earlier names may be a redirect that requires disambiguation (we do try to track previous names by redirecting these names to the vessel's latest established name). Frabby (talk) 01:37, 4 March 2024 (EST)
When the time comes, I'll be thorough during my checks. :) Csdavis715 (talk) 02:21, 4 March 2024 (EST)