User talk:Neufeld


Welcome, Neufeld, 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 Pillars 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.
  • Also consider writing something about yourself on your UserPage (marked as "Neufeld" 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 we will know you're a human rather than a spambot and we won't block and delete you accidentally.
  • For your first few edits on the wiki, please do not add any URLs (which can be an indicator of SPAM).
  • 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.
  • Introduce yourself at the new user log.
  • 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 (~~~~); 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*******

Year pages[edit]

Neufeld, can you please hold off on making the changes to those articles. The single division addition you made doesn't match what appears to be where consenus is heading and it will all be undone. Plus, since the policy hasn't even been written yet (since it hasn't been agreed to either), some people are thinking that what you are doing is the final form. I appreciate the drive you're showing, but let us firm up what the page will look like. I'll then write 9hopefully) easy instructions on how to use the code you're experimenting with. It'll be at least seven days from final consensus, but then you'll be free for take off once the policy is released (which will make the main page). Thanks. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 18:24, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok. --Neufeld 18:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Canon policy[edit]

Thank you all your efforts to add info from TRO:3050U to the 'Mech articles. While I appreciate your zeal in adding missing Battle Values to these 'Mechs, information from non-canon sources must be very clearly separate from information from canon sources to reflect the authority that the latter have. I, too, would like to see that information available, but Solaris Skunkworks is not a canon source and so cannot be used for this purpose. Please read Policy:Canon for more information. --Scaletail 23:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

All Purpose Award[edit]

I know it may seem to be a 'I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine' kinda deal at first look (since you gave me an AP today), I do sincerely feel appreciative for your highlighting of numerous 'articles' that needed killin', err, deleting. For getting into the guts of BTW to weed out the chaff, I present you with the All Purpose ribbon:

All Purpose Award, 1st ribbon
Thanks! --Neufeld 05:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Command Console[edit]

Hi Neufeld, hope things are well for you. I had question, since you've been updating or sprucing up the Duel Cockpit. Are you planning to do the Command Console article too? Tactical Operations has it in the book as Cockpit Command Console. I'm not up on the old rules, so i'm not sure if the older Command Console rules are similar. -- Wrangler 19:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm right now mostly focusing on how to represent rules, and not the details. (see Policy Talk:Canon) So, I haven't planned visiting that article right now. Might do some research into later. Haven't got access to older rules. --Neufeld 19:53, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
I took a look at the Command Console, and added what I found in TO. Some rules was a bit different to what was in the article, so I marked those sections as OLD:. I'm now finished with that article, until we make some decision on how to represent rules. --Neufeld 21:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the assistance, Neufeld. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 01:13, 22 March 2010 (UTC)


Hi, tnx for your help though your afterwork of my articles. My english isn't perfect and you help me to correct my false speaking if necessary. I Read above that you will add some information about the academies from the LAAF. Let us work togehter and expand this project to all academiess. What are you thinking about it? Neuling 07:27, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I have added what I intended to add. I'm not interested in doing more academies now. The only thing I would like to see added is the academy logos from Handbook: House Steiner. --Neufeld 12:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)


Great job, Neufeld, with 3050. In order to synch up with policy, I made some changes to it. Please take a look. If you and I start everyone off the the same foot, we'll hopefully avoid what happened to the pages previously. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 17:37, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Just read 3051. Great work, again. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 17:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I hope I got everything. --Neufeld 17:43, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


Hy, why you delete the Battle of Luthien from the year page, i think it is a significant date.Doneve 20:28, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

The Battle of Luthien article don't have the date. You add the date there, and I will add it back in 3052. --Neufeld 20:31, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


Morning, Neufeld. I agree with your reversion on Category:Burst-Fire Weapons‎‎. It doesn't appear to be vandalism, but it didn't make much sense. Probably the first attempts by a new Editor, but it was obviously abandoned.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 11:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I was wondering if he tried to list mechs with burst-fire weapons. --Neufeld 13:09, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Random Act of Appreciation Award[edit]

Because I haven't given one of these in a while and your name came up. Glad you're contributing, Neufeld.

Random Act of Appreciation Award, 1st ribbon

--Revanche (talk|contribs) 18:09, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! --Neufeld 18:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Battle Value worksheet[edit]

Neufeld, please have a look at the template: User:Mbear/BVWorksheet. Comments welcome.--Mbear 14:12, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look and comment on the talk page. --Neufeld 16:18, 19 April 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for taking care of the BV categories. I had planned on doing that when I came back from vacation (now), but now I don't have to! In appreciation, I give you an all-purpose award. All Purpose Award, 2nd ribbon --Scaletail 23:33, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Well done. ClanWolverine101 01:00, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
And thank you for the reward. --Neufeld 06:48, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Mace redirects[edit]

As you saw, I have moved Mace to Mace (custom vehicle). However, I reckon we should leave the redirect in place until somebody creates the "real" article for the canonical Mace. If I was the person who had created the original fanon article then I would re-visit my own article, and unless there's a new article in its place moving the fanon away without a redirect might be mistaken for a deletion. For the same reason I reckon there should be a note of some sort on the talk page.
Generally, please don't simply blank pages. They should be deleted, or if you can't do that, put in a deletion tag. Frabby 15:35, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

As I saw it a redirect is more confusing than a blank page. Especially since people would expect to find mace - the weapon following a mace link. --Neufeld 16:43, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Vandervahn Chistu[edit]

Hey Neufeld - Question : I understand the flag you put up only if you intend to put a whole bunch of stuff from the animated series in there. Why is it an issue? ClanWolverine101 23:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I thought better safe than sorry. Remove it if you thinks its fine without it. --Neufeld 23:19, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
I respect your concerns. All I know is all my sources are canon. If you're concerned about the image, I know there's one pic of him from the JF book and another from the TCG. ClanWolverine101 23:29, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Notable pilots: Possible answer[edit]

Please review: BattleTechWiki_talk:Project_BattleMechs#Notable_Pilots_Sample_page. Thanks!--Mbear 14:17, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Clan Khans[edit]

Hi Neufeld, i was wondering if you would like some help with the Clan Khan profiles? -- Wrangler 15:27, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'm just adding the very basics from Op:Klondike like clan and birthdate, so feel free to add more stuff. --Neufeld 15:30, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Battle Armor info question[edit]

Hello Neufeld, i had question for you. You rightfully informed me of my ignorance about having to put reference information from linked info from the year page. The Battle Armor page itself is a sort-of out of game info. With no reference section, Are we suppose to put that sort thing in pages like that? I'll be bold do it, but doesn't seem right i guess. -- Wrangler 22:47, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I see no problem putting in-game history in the article, on the other hand some people seems to have problems with putting things related to game rules in articles. Be bold about it. --Neufeld 22:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


Hy Neufeld, i don't know if you add the variant content to the Nightsky, yes or no ??, when yes i must say sorry, the source falls under the moratorium. Greetings--Doneve 18:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

No I didn't add it. But it is annoying to see people not knowing about the moratorium getting reverted all the time. It also gives an unfriendly impression. --Neufeld 18:26, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Ok you're right. It was not my intention to give unfriendly impression.--Doneve 18:31, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
It would be better to continue this discussion on the template discussion page. --Neufeld 18:34, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Clan Widowmaker saKhan Sanders[edit]

Hi Neufeld, i had left out a link to saKhan Sander from Khan Karrige's page due to lack of any information or profile on her. I was to add link when there was something on her. Won't be better not have red-link to something that likely for immeditate future not have a page unless they have some kind of book or something on her? -- Wrangler 01:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I feel that it is better to add the link right from the start, otherwise it is likely to be forgotten. Also with a red-link people see that the page is missing right from the beginning, without it they would have to search for the character first. --Neufeld 06:32, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


Hy Neufeld, nice to see you back after a while, i give you this Random Act of Appreciation Award, 2nd ribbon award, for the documents categorization.--Doneve 11:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! However, a part of the honor goes to BrokenMnemonic, since he made me notice the existence of that category. --Neufeld 11:30, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


Hy Neufeld, please take a look on Neulings Variants+Manufacturers talk page, i don't understand this guy, he is on over one year and dont follow any policys, please take a look on the and give me a response what you think of the page, all the info can add in the various manufacturing center pages, sorry for rough writing.--Doneve 21:45, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

It is a badly formated mess. It is typical of his contributions. I no longer want to deal with his edits, and they are a big reason why I have given up working of the toumans house military pages. --Neufeld 06:10, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Hy Neufeld, its suprise me that you use such hard words. I agree that sometimes my work is in some way chaotic but "always a mess" in your opinion , please that is under your niveau. I think the work I put it in the Sarna project is misunderstood. I create many of the mercanery articles and gives them their initial content and rework them later. Many user consider my work with suspicion. I will rethink if it usefull to me and the community to continue the cooperation, because I improved my work over the last months but that is not enougth, I think to meet the standards of the I had ideas but they are worthless, because when I something greated what is not in the common way it is deleted, changed back or merged with other articles. I understand you as admin which have the task to enforce the politics of the community. I'm not angry about you or the other users. Perhaps in the furture it exist a way to show my work at an different place and with the tolerance/acceptance of the community. Thnx for your support. Neuling 16:10, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Two hints to avoid annoying people: 1. Do not use tables. 2. Figure out formating before you start adding a lot of info, and experiment either in the sandbox or a userpage (like Mbear added). --Neufeld 18:56, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Oh my god, thanks, you talke this in a view words, what i want to say,...:).--Doneve 19:14, 21 September 2011 (UTC)


Hy Neufeld please can you add citations to the Shin Legion article and other summarys you added, that was very helpfull, thanks, oh and great work to cleanup the DCMS page.--Doneve 14:18, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do, since I mostly tweaked and edited information already in existence somewhere on the wiki. --Neufeld 14:25, 24 September 2011 (UTC)


Hy Neufeld, i see your new created militia pages, and i found a failur in the added category, not military --> Lyran Militia Commands is the right category.--Doneve 00:39, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, OK. Thanks. --Neufeld 07:31, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Lyran Royal Guards[edit]

Hi Neufeld,

I've been uploading unit logo images from Historical: Reunification War and adding them to unit entries. I noticed that you're editing the Royal Guards - there's now a logo for the 4th Royal Guards if you want to include it in the article when it's done: File:4th_Royal_Guards_2596.png BrokenMnemonic 19:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, the under construction is something that has been there for a long time, so I removed it. I also added the logo at the same time. --Neufeld 23:16, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Steiner dates[edit]

Neufeld, you need to pause in your edits. Your semantic code is visible to all and isn't doing what it should be doing for the article. Done properly, the code would not be seen. Please contact Seth before taking any further steps to get guidance on how to update these articles properly. Thanks.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 14:32, 17 March 2012 (PDT)

Hy Neufeld you must create at first a Template and Property page, but Revanche talke to you the best way is you contact Seth to help with this.--Doneve 14:42, 17 March 2012 (PDT)
Take a look how Seth handle this on the following pages Template:Red Corsair Timeline, Property:Red Corsair Event and see the result on this page Red Corsair#Red Corsair Campaign Timeline, i hope this helps.--Doneve 15:01, 17 March 2012 (PDT)
I tried to use the same approach, but could not get it to work. Templates are too hard to use. --Neufeld 15:04, 17 March 2012 (PDT)
Talk to Seth he help and give you a guidline.--Doneve 15:05, 17 March 2012 (PDT)
Good job. Appears to be hidden, now.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 12:15, 18 March 2012 (PDT)

Semantic wiki[edit]

Hy Neufeld i talk to Seth and he give us this guidline, great stuff, BattleTechWiki talk:SemanticMediaWiki.--Doneve 04:16, 18 March 2012 (PDT)

I added "display:none;" to the span tag for the template since my phone didn't resize the font to 0. Should be good now. You can see if the properties are added properly by previewing an edit. Properties are displayed as "Facts about this Page".--Seth 10:24, 18 March 2012 (PDT)
I also noticed that you haven't defined the properties Property:Inherited From and Property:Name of the Realm as either [[Has type::page]] or [[Has type::text]] (depending on what you want)--Seth 10:30, 18 March 2012 (PDT)
Thanks. I will go and correct that. --Neufeld 10:32, 18 March 2012 (PDT)

Timeline Stuff[edit]


  • Victor gets listed from his Archon entry.
This can be fixed by renaming the properties that define who the FedSuns charts are looking for. For example, instead of it looking for the [[Inherited From::]], you can have specific properties for each realm like [[FedSuns Inherited From::]] and so on with the rest of the properties. You'll have to create a separate template page for each realm as well since the current template works best with the list of Archons. Once you do those two things, your chart code will look like this:
{{#ask:[[Category:FedSuns Rulers]]
|?First Prince Reign Began=Reign Began
|?First Prince Reign Ended=Reign Ended
|?First Prince Inherited From=Inherited From
|?First Prince Title=Title
|sort=First Prince Reign Began
|mainlabel=First Princes of the Federated Suns Realm

Adding the "=Reign Began" to the line "|?First Prince Reign Began" ensures that your table still looks like the Archon one.--Seth 22:36, 21 March 2012 (PDT)

  • Presidents lacks the First Princes category.
You can have your template add a category to all pages you add the template to. So you don't have to have your Semantic Table look for pages in a Category that already exists. If you add "[[Category:FedSuns Rulers]] to your template, any page you add that template to will be listed under the "FedSuns Rulers" category. Then instead of having this line at the top of your table:
{{#ask:[[Category:First Princes]]

you would have:

{{#ask:[[Category:FedSuns Rulers]]

This is especially useful for Kathrine Steiner-Davion who was the defacto ruler of the FedSuns for a few years.--Seth 22:36, 21 March 2012 (PDT)

I see you have been adding the [[Category:Federated Suns Rulers]] manually to each FedSun's ruler's page. It's not necessary to do that. Simply add it to the "Template:First Prince Timeline" page. Once you do that, any page that you add that template to will automatically add the "[[Category:Federated Suns Rulers]]" tag to the bottom. Must faster that way, trust me.--Seth 22:50, 22 March 2012 (PDT)
Thanks! Stuff seems to work correctly now. --Neufeld 00:58, 23 March 2012 (PDT)
Hy Neufeld i see you added at this morning some semantic stuff to the First Princes, but not all members are shown in the timetable?--Doneve 10:17, 24 March 2012 (PDT)
Well, Alexander is missing since I have not decided how to deal with the regency, and I have not added data for the Succession Wars era rulers.--Neufeld 10:38, 24 March 2012 (PDT)


Neufeld - I want to apologize for some of my past comments to you. I over-reacted to something, but that was no excuse. If you'd like to have a civil discussion about my AFFC article or anything else, I'd be very appreciative. Thanks. ClanWolverine101 22:23, 23 March 2012 (PDT)

Apology accepted. As for the various armed forces articles, I do not feel like working on or discussing them right now. --Neufeld 00:00, 24 March 2012 (PDT)


Thanks for taking care of the links on the Dianne Sennet page as well as the name change. That was a bad one on my part. --Rebs 15:28, 26 March 2012 (PDT)

The Battle of New Avalon[edit]

Neufeld - I added a citation for McCarel Farm. Its like this: The "First Battle of New Avalon" actually means "First Battle of New Avalon during the Jihad". (There is a reference.) Regarding your FCCW argument, I see your point. Basically, we're talking about five battles:

  • First Battle of New Avalon (FCCW): 1st Davion Guards vs. three of Katherine's units
  • Second Battle of New Avalon (FCCW) : Victor's task force finally takes Katherine down
  • First Battle of New Avalon (Jihad) : 31st Division Attacks
  • Second Battle of New Avalon (Jihad) : 31st and 36th Divisions Attack
  • Third Battle of New Avalon (Jihad) : 44th Shadow Division leads the 31st and 36th Divisions in an attack

I have suggested that the latter three be consolidated on a single article called Battle of New Avalon (Jihad), and we should likely do the same for the FCCW. Again, there ARE references, and I have added the citation. ClanWolverine101 00:57, 13 May 2012 (PDT)

Sounds like a good solution. --Neufeld 01:34, 13 May 2012 (PDT)

Lynn McKenna[edit]

Glad you helped out there! I know you are a fan of the Raven Alliance, so if you know of sources and stuff, that would be excellent. Her article will likely be an ongoing project for a few days. It will probably be a long one too, as was the Stephen McKenna article.--Rebs 03:16, 24 June 2012 (PDT)

Well, I will keep my eyes open if I spot something to add, but it is not like I am good at writing biographies or have some special notes compiled on Raven stuff. --Neufeld 06:15, 24 June 2012 (PDT)
No problem! Jihad: Final Reckoning provided a great deal of info (great book), and that was what I needed. And thanks for noting the conflict about Storm Crow Naval Pursuit Star's CO... that one was vexing me a bit. --Rebs 20:04, 25 June 2012 (PDT)

Hiding User Creation and Deletion in Recent Changes[edit]

Is it possible to hide user creations, deletions and mergers on the Special:RecentChanges page? It is annoying to see the log flooded by those messages, just now there is one real edit in the last 50 changes, the rest are all related to user management. --Neufeld 02:44, 16 July 2012 (PDT)

Neufeld, in the RecentChanges page there's a drop down list with various Namespaces in it. By default it shows everything. To just see real entries (updated/modified pages) select the (Main) namespace from the drop down list and hit the Go button. That should give you what you need.--Mbear(talk) 07:53, 16 July 2012 (PDT)
Yes, that makes it much better. Thanks! --Neufeld 09:19, 16 July 2012 (PDT)

Updated conflict infobox[edit]

Neufeld, please have a look at User:Mbear/PlanetPageTest. I've got a prototype for the updated infobox up and running. I'd like to hear your thoughts. Thanks!--Mbear(talk) 07:25, 2 November 2012 (PDT)

It looks fine to me. If anything needs to change then it would be just some minor formating tweaks. --Neufeld (talk) 16:38, 3 November 2012 (PDT)
It seems that I posted a little too early. I found three minor issues: "forces involved" needs to start with a capital letter, links to the factions would also be nice and location needs to include planet and faction. --Neufeld (talk) 16:45, 3 November 2012 (PDT)
Neufeld - I agree with you on the capitalization. The other two issues you mention are perfectly legit, but would be the responsibility of the article's writer/editor. Neither are impacted by the box's format. (As for this particular battle, this won't be the final product.) ClanWolverine101 (talk) 05:05, 5 November 2012 (PST)
Fixed first one. Second and Third are responsibility of article author.--Mbear(talk) 06:16, 5 November 2012 (PST)