Sarna News: Bad 'Mechs - Banshee

User talk:Pserratv/Archive 2018

-- New user message (talk) 07:54, 8 June 2016 (PDT)


Welcome, Pserratv/Archive 2018, 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 "Pserratv/Archive 2018" 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 (~~~~); 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*******

Personal Welcome[edit]

Thanks for joining! You're right, the spanish edition BT is mostly unknown territory here on Sarna. Heck, German was the biggest translated edition and I haven't come round to giving it a good coverage here yet.

Going by the differences in the German edition, a few questions:

  • Which novels were translated?
  • Did they change product content in Spain like they did in Germany? Like, changing short stories, art, "kitbashing" stuff from several sourcebooks together into a new one, or even add content such as new 'Mech variants?

Frabby (talk) 08:54, 27 November 2017 (EST)

I hope I answer correctly:
  • Which novels were translated? --> When I started only the basic ones (the two trilogies), though they expanded. Now we have all these:
  • Did they change product content in Spain like they did in Germany? Like, changing short stories, art, "kitbashing" stuff from several sourcebooks together into a new one, or even add content such as new 'Mech variants? --> There was nothing changed in spanish in terms of mech names, but in terms of weapon names, all were changed, this included the recordsheed themselves.

pserratv (talk) 17:10, 27 November 2017 (EST)


Very happy to see your magazine articles - this is good info, so thank you! I've put them on my to-do list for tidying up, but they arent't too bad. I've been toying with the idea to create a "BattleTech articles in magazines" article and if and when that happens I may fold those articles into the summary article. But that's a long time in the future, if ever.

As for articles on individual 'Mechs, I don't think they are notable enough because none of those magazines had any official sanction. So they are fully non-canonical (as in, their content was never a "BattleTech" publication but instead a tie-in). As such, the 'Mechs and scenarios featured therein are non-canon and not apocryphal. Frabby (talk) 09:23, 29 November 2017 (EST)

TCI Model Kits[edit]

If you're interested in more detail about those model kits, drop me a mail to frabbybc /at/ ;) Frabby (talk) 17:58, 8 December 2017 (EST)

Reinventing the wheel[edit]

Pserratv, whilst I appreciate the enthusiasm and we encourage people to be bold, you do not need to reinvent the wheel! If you find yourself writing an article have a look at other articles and see how they handle things (like multiple planets in a system or brigade level commands), a lot of these things have been talked out and done in a very specific way for a reason. There are still gaps in the wiki but a lot of things have also already been done.

I refer you to project BattleTechWiki:Project Military Commands and BattleTechWiki:Project Planets, BattleTechWiki talk:Planet Article Overhaul where a lot of these things where standardized, these might help. Keep up the good work and feel free to ask if you want help with anything.--Dmon (talk) 10:17, 30 December 2017 (EST)

I fully understand your comments, but I would like to explain myself better.

First, on the Mica planets, I saw the Mica Majority entre, and there I saw: Planetary Data

   Colonized Planets: Mica II, V, VII
   Star Type: K3V
   Positions in System: 2, 5, 7
   Time to Jump Point: 4.3, 4.6, 5.1 days
   Recharging Station: Zenith
   HPG Class Type: B

Where there was no link to Mica II because the entry did not exist. Only Mica I, V and VII. So I decided to copy & paste Mica I as Mica II to amend this. Indeed the existing planet is Mica II. Then I amended the links between them. Maybe the correct way of doing was having a single article for the 3 Mican planets (as they are in the same system). If that is the issue sorry for doing just a partial amendmend.

On mercenary commands, I was copying Wolf Dragoons format. Let me explain: if you look in any of the Mercenary Handboods/Readouts units are named by their big name: Kell Hounds, Wolf Dragoons, Khorsakiv's Kossacs, Lindon's Battalion... The last one has a "single unit" so everything is in a single article. The other ones have several regiments and they list the global information and then the regiments one by one. It makes sense to have a placeholder article with the global information and then articles on each regiment, which has already been done. So what I think and I did already explain is that in the mercenary list we have to link only let's say the parent unit, not the subcommands. While doing my first test I saw that in Wolf's Dragoons there was a subcategory to easily list the subcommands and I though... let's copy it. If the general idea is to keep this only for iconic units... we need a "list" of iconic units. But I still think that the list of mercenary commands should only link the global units.

Minor units and Characters[edit]

Hey Pserratv, Just wanted to say thank you for adding the minor units and characters you have been adding. These are the kind of things I personally feel the Wiki can never have too many along with the Planets, (RPG fodder for GM's to use), So I have would like to present you with an award to show my appreciation.

Random Act of Appreciation Award, 1st ribbon

i have also taken the opportunity to move your projects list onto your profile and install an awards board. --Dmon (talk) 13:10, 9 January 2018 (EST)

Westerhand Cat[edit]


I have flagged your Westerhand Category for deletion and changed the link in the character article to Capellan, if we go down the route of planet specific categories then we could potentially create thousands of new categories for no real reason. --Dmon (talk) 06:14, 23 March 2018 (EDT)

No problem at all. I did it and even I was not sure. Solaris VII has a valid list of warriors that really make for a category. Westerhand as a gaming world is small. Same I feel for Noisel for example.--Pserratv (talk) 06:16, 23 March 2018 (EDT)
Maybe something more specific like [Westerhand Games Characters], I put a note in the Solaris Category a few weeks ago prompting a similar move there, but it is not really actionable until the technical problems the site is having are solved.--Dmon (talk) 06:24, 23 March 2018 (EDT)
I've been thinking and we could group the other Game Worlds in a category (non-Solaris Games Worlds) or something like this--Pserratv (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2018 (EDT)
I agree it is a good idea, Not sure what to call it though, (non-Solaris Games Worlds) is descriptive but sounds rather lacking.--Dmon (talk) 08:12, 5 May 2018 (EDT)
Given that Solaris is the Game World, how about "Lesser Games Worlds" or "Minor Games Worlds"? BrokenMnemonic (talk) 09:24, 5 May 2018 (EDT)
I'm not english native speaker, for me "Minor Games Worlds" sounds better :)--Pserratv (talk) 18:29, 5 May 2018 (EDT)
"Minor" is a weasel word that should always be avoided as much as possible. For the time being, I'm willing to accept that Solaris VII overshines 'Mech games on all other worlds so much that it has become synonymous with 'Mech games - but admittedly I'm not 100% happy with that either. Perhaps a Category: 'Mech Games should be used as it's a neutral title, and Solaris Games, Category: Solaris Games, Category: Westerhand Games, Category: Noisiel Games, etc. all redirect there. Would that be a workable compromise? Frabby (talk) 15:15, 6 May 2018 (EDT)
I feel the same about the word Frabby, so I think your idea is the most workable thus far.--Dmon (talk) 15:19, 6 May 2018 (EDT)
I've seen there is a link Category:Game Worlds. We should link the articles here I feel.--Pserratv (talk) 17:49, 6 May 2018 (EDT)

Untranslated Products category[edit]

This actually a good idea. But I'd suggest dividing it up even move, with a Category:Foreign language products master category, and one sub-category for each product, i.e. Category:German language products, Category:French language products, Category:Spanish language products, etc. - I am busy right now but I'll install the categories later today (or later this week, or soon (TM) anyways). Feel free to get ahead of me. :) Frabby (talk) 07:39, 18 April 2018 (EDT)

Yes, this seems like a common sense idea--Dmon (talk) 08:38, 18 April 2018 (EDT)
Implementing it. I'll kill after that the link to the untranslated categories--Pserratv (talk) 08:39, 18 April 2018 (EDT)

Waldorff City Police Department[edit]

While doing a review of Recent Changes, the term Waldorff City Police Department caught my eye. I realize you started the article back in January, but I thought you should be recognized for the quirkiness of the article. So please accept the Surreal Award for your efforts chronicling the heroics of this beleaguered police force.

Surreal Award, 1st ribbon

I also the Edit Count award is way overdue, as you have logged 2,642 edits since you joined in June of 2016, as is the Time In Service Award. Both of these you can update yourself, but I'll add all three to your awards board right now, for you.

Thank you. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 15:55, 9 May 2018 (EDT)

Thanks! I do not know how to track the board, and I have no idea on how to track contributions. If you tell me how, thanks again!--Pserratv (talk) 07:24, 10 May 2018 (EDT)
When you find your name on the User Score page (found on the Sidebar), you will see your countable edits. If you click on that number and then sort by oldest, you'll find when you first joined and edited Sarna.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 14:26, 22 May 2018 (EDT)


Afternoon, Pserratv. Would you please confirm that the pages numbers associated with the BattleMech role Juggernaut Classic BattleTech Introductory Box Set are the same as were cited for the Classic BattleTech Introductory Rulebook (i.e., pp. 51 & 54)? I presume that the citation for the box set might need to specifically refer to a certain titled booklet within, and I have doubts the page numbers still line up. Thanks. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 16:57, 18 May 2018 (EDT)

I only edited a link that was broken... I imagined the original owner was ok.--Pserratv (talk) 11:43, 19 May 2018 (EDT)
I don't think the link was broken, but rather the article had not been created, right? The Introductory Rulebook (a free PDF) and the Introductory Box Set are two different products, so (I presume) page numbers for the former would not apply to the latter. If I'm misunderstanding, please let me know. Thank you. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 11:46, 19 May 2018 (EDT)

Hendrik Grimm Wanted Poster[edit]

Nice find. But, as you point out, it is dated 2987 so obviously doesn't refer to Hendrik Grimm III. It is a valuable lead to Hendrik Grimm II's tenure though. Can you cite the source? Generally, when uploading images, please make use of the Template:Image summary to provide the neccessary information along with the image. Frabby (talk) 12:38, 22 May 2018 (EDT)

I'll amend both and ensure dates and references are posted!--Pserratv (talk) 12:40, 22 May 2018 (EDT)
Also learned a new thing today... I've uploaded a few images... never used this template! Sorry--Pserratv (talk) 12:46, 22 May 2018 (EDT)
No apologies. Frabby is just seeking to enhance the value you're already providing.--Revanche (talk|contribs) 14:20, 22 May 2018 (EDT)

The Wylde Cards[edit]


Thank you for editing The Wylde Cards page. As their creator, I appreciate the help you gave with organization, as I am still learning the ropes.

No problem. I got a lot of help at the beginning, so no worries. As the page says, be bold!--Pserratv (talk) 09:41, 24 May 2018 (EDT)

House Youngblood[edit]

I did a quick edit of the House Youngblood pages, they look good! Those folks have way to many relatives.

Straw Boss (talk) 12:37, 24 May 2018 (EDT)
Most apocryphal, but yes!!--Pserratv (talk) 12:40, 24 May 2018 (EDT)

Dice Sets[edit]

Not sure if individual third-party pieces of apparel like these dice sets deserve their own articles. I'm sure there's been at least five different sets of "official" dice in the past ten years when you count GenCon specials. (Funny that they only put regular dice and not those shiny BT dice into the starter boxes, come to think of it.) If we're going down this rabbit hole then there's a zillion articles coming up that imho have very limited informative value. I've long thought about a catchall article called BattleTech Apparel but the sheer size of the field has so far kept me from doing anything there.

And yes, we do have the BattleTech Patches article. But these were a FASA product, not one of a myriad of third-party products.

I am not even against this article; I just want to voice my thoughts and hopefully incite a fruitful discussion. So... discuss! :) Frabby (talk) 15:17, 24 May 2018 (EDT)

I added them there because by the photos and everything they say also Catalyst. And they are sold in that webpage--Pserratv (talk) 17:50, 24 May 2018 (EDT)
It is something i am interested in a a sarna user. In fact i have gone on an online search spree in the past trying to find all of the BattleTech dice sets released over the years; having that info on Sarna would have helped a lot. I do see the argument in the massive amounts of 3rd party products that could be added, but personally i am in favor of letting dice in as they are used in game. --Straw Boss (talk) 17:59, 24 May 2018 (EDT)
I've seen what Straw Boss has done (checked it myself). And we have also the Dice Sets from MechWarrior Dark Age... the GenCon ones... not sure. Which ones were sold and which weren't? Which do have an official Catalyst OK? That should be the line in my opinion.--Pserratv (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2018 (EDT)

I feel a bit stupid now that Straw Boss has called me out on judging the relevance based on my own interests. :) Just because I am not a miniatures or apparel guy myself and don't particularly care about those doesn't mean the articles are irrelevant.

With that in mind, I suggest to create a Category and start drawing up as many articles as we can. There should of course be a minimum of meaningful content in these articles, and images (photos) are particularly important. Question to native speakers though: According to my dictionary, "Apparel" only refers to clothing. Is it an appropriate catchall word for BT sidelines merchandise such as T-shirts, patches, dice, mugs, keychains, checks, and what-have-you? Is there a better term or name for the category? Frabby (talk) 03:32, 26 May 2018 (EDT)

I would go with "Accessories". -- Straw Boss (talk) 03:38, 26 May 2018 (EDT)
"Accessories" seems a good call, "Apparel" would be clothing. Both would have a place in the top level products category I created last month. [Category:BattleTech Universe Products] --Dmon (talk) 04:09, 26 May 2018 (EDT)
Sounds good. Thanks guys. Let's do this. --> Category:BattleTech Accessories Frabby (talk) 04:43, 26 May 2018 (EDT)

You are in demand[edit]

I am part of a BattleTech group on Facebook and i think someone is trying to connect with you:

From Facebook user: Magnus Ooferson

Any spanish battletech guys here from

I don't speak spanish myself so can't figure out how to join, but wanted to get in touch with a user on it called pserratv regarding his solaris stuff.

any help getting me in contact with him is appreciated thank you

-- 17:13, 25 May 2018‎ Straw Boss

Sent him a message. Let's see--Pserratv (talk) 18:03, 25 May 2018 (EDT)

Unit officer section[edit]

Hey Pserratv, I have noticed that you have dropped the officer tables from your newly created unit articles and have started simply putting in text. Can I ask why? --Dmon (talk) 10:08, 7 June 2018 (EDT)

That is what the template says... it has no table there. I can add it when I know.--Pserratv (talk) 10:17, 7 June 2018 (EDT)
Template needs updating then. Cheers --Dmon (talk) 10:20, 7 June 2018 (EDT)
I've updated unit. Will update template now :)--Pserratv (talk) 10:21, 7 June 2018 (EDT)
Thank you :-) --Dmon (talk) 10:22, 7 June 2018 (EDT)
Done. You are mostly welcomed! And thanks for comment.--Pserratv (talk) 10:24, 7 June 2018 (EDT)

Takeo Shinden[edit]

Good morning! I'm unfamiliar with Takeo Shinden, but did see your edit note about Theo Cramer. Should the former be deleted? Or should is Takeo an alternate name for Theo? If the latter, I can set up a re-direct to Theo. Let me know. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 10:52, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

Takeo Shinden is another character. He is a DCMS mechwarrior. Theo Cramer is a broker and also a Mafia Bartolli member. I mixed names by mistake.--Pserratv (talk) 12:31, 25 June 2018 (EDT)
Gotcha. I’ll delete it then. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 14:10, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

Solaris City[edit]

Howdy, i'm one semi-retired editors from Sarna. I have to say i like what you been up to with the page for Solaris City. I had wanted do this years ago, but i had resigned to put that info in the Solaris planet info. I wanted ask you, are you going to include the post Jihad-era related material on Solaris City in the page? The Wolf Hunters Novel has story featured on Solaris, where the post-Jihad changes of the city are featured. Urban Combat Zones in parts of the city that were never repaired. Etc. Also the Experimental Technical Readout: Royal Fantasy is also a Solaris related source, which has been stated to be be actually canon, while the Wolf Empire allows combat matches to continue on planet. Best Regards! -- Wrangler (talk) 19:04, 15 July 2018 (EDT)

Hi Wrangler. The answer is yes, I'm doing a full Solaris VII update. But at my pace. I'm still reviewing two documents pre-jihad. Then will go Jihad, and finally Dark Age. And in the middle I have at least identified two novels/short histories that will add information to the Solaris world. It is just a matter of time :)--Pserratv (talk) 03:27, 16 July 2018 (EDT)

Some contributions do not appear in Recent Changes[edit]

I've seen that though the personal contributions always work, they are not always visible in the Recent Changes... not sure why...--Pserratv (talk) 03:59, 25 July 2018 (EDT)

I have this problem as well--Dmon (talk) 12:03, 28 July 2018 (EDT)
Any idea why it happens??--Pserratv (talk) 13:16, 28 July 2018 (EDT)

Officers section[edit]

Hey Pserratv, I just want to ask you what your plans are for what you have done with the officers section in the 1st Jaguar Guards article.

I personally have always taken the view that although "officers" could be taken as the entire officer core (much like you have done in the mentioned article), but rather it is intended to highlight the Commanding Officers of said unit.--Dmon (talk) 12:02, 28 July 2018 (EDT)

I added Star Captains and Star Colonels, maybe I got it wrong. Star Colonels should for sure be in the table of Commanding officers, maybe the others should get a other officers (as they are clan in this cas I've added bloodnamend and non-bloodnamed tables). I added them all because I saw they were already in... my incorrect assumption. I've ammended the unit again, which is your feeling?--Pserratv (talk) 13:16, 28 July 2018 (EDT)
Evening Pserratv, I approve of your work on the Bloodname aricles, it will add a new dimension of functionality to the articles that as they currently stand did not exist. I do think maybe we should change the title of the section to be "Known Bloodname Holders" rather than "Notable Bloodname Holders" if we are to include all bloodnamed warriors. Bringing this back to the officers sections, having all the bloodnamed officers of a military command listed and crosslinked with bloodname articles it has further implications for the wider military commands project. If we set a similar standard for Inner Sphere units the lists could become a bit of a nightmare to maintain--Dmon (talk) 18:19, 13 August 2018 (EDT)
I know the risk is there. I was thinking on starting only Bloodnamed warriors... not just all military commands. Maybe I overdid myself.--Pserratv (talk) 03:19, 14 August 2018 (EDT)
Ok lets go with Bloodnamed warriors for now then and leave the other stuff for a later date. Also be careful, the template you are using on the articles has a spelling mistake, Officers with two f's--Dmon (talk) 04:17, 14 August 2018 (EDT)
Going to amend them all--Pserratv (talk) 04:29, 14 August 2018 (EDT)

Elimination of Minor Characters Category[edit]

Why are you removing the category for Minor characters category? I know categories aren't necessary used a lot. However it does help people tell this someone says "Hi, i'm bob. I'm Mechwarrior who will be in your lance" is never heard of again. That's why it's minor character. Same time you got someone present in major scenes but isn't contributing to a story or the over all-dynamic of the universe. That's still minor character. -- Wrangler (talk) 12:37, 7 August 2018 (EDT)

I see your putting them in a list format. I'm not sure that's as readable as category. We've in the past had them, editors have eliminated them. We had one like the one your making for Mercenary Units. Category should be still retained. Sorry to be a bother -- Wrangler (talk) 12:39, 7 August 2018 (EDT)
Wrangler, Eliminating the category was a mutual decision between Myself, Frabby and Pserratv that the minor character category is something the wiki can do without. A lot of the "minor" characters where things like Khans of various Clans or Captain-Generals etc. This is a gross miss-representation of in universe status due to the character not getting a lot of print space. So we are making an effort to move the character articles into a more useful and defined space and whilst we are at it attempting to improve the standard of said articles a bit by doing things like adding in infoboxes.--Dmon (talk) 13:17, 7 August 2018 (EDT)
I see. Thing is i don't agree. Minor character means to me didn't have much done with the character over the course of the fiction. Nothing written up on it, nothing played part that effected the story. I guess its another case of me being either out of touch of the community of editors or isolated view of how characters are defined in the universe. --Wrangler (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2018 (EDT)
For me minor itself means nothing. I mean a character belongs to a country, a secret society society or something like this. Nobody is Minor. They might have less information, but that does not make them Minor. For me what we do not have are characters to which we cannot assign an organization.--Pserratv (talk) 15:21, 7 August 2018 (EDT)
I am of the same mind as Pserratv on this, They are not minor characters, they are major characters in waiting. Walter de Mensil is the perfect example, background character in 1988, sidekick in 2008 and eventually the lead character in 2017.--Dmon (talk) 16:48, 7 August 2018 (EDT)

I also feel the wiki needs to evolve, We have articles on all the units, all the commands, all the planets, all the weapons and a lot of the major characters. Outside that the wiki was fairly stagnant for a couple of years and then this year there have been a few major projects initiated exploring areas that where fairly lacking. Namely Pserratvs Solaris project and my Noble Houses project, both rely on crossreferencing small details pretty heavily.--Dmon (talk) 16:55, 7 August 2018 (EDT)

Castilian Principalities[edit]


I just noticed your edit to the affiliations records for the various Castilian Principalities worlds; I'm away from home, so I don't have access to my hard copy of Explorer Corps, but does it confirm that all of the Castilian worlds had been settled by 2392? While I've seen a reference to the founding of the Principalities in the timeline in Era Digest: Dark Age, I don't remember anything specifying that all of the worlds were settled at once, and other nations like the United Hindu Collective tend to begin with a small number of worlds followed by colonial expansion or conquest. When I've been updating the affiliations lists through the Planets project, I've been careful to avoid implying that planets were inhabited at a certain point unless there's a specific reference that namechecks them. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 15:32, 15 August 2018 (EDT)

It only confirms Castille... I'll amend the rest--Pserratv (talk) 15:55, 15 August 2018 (EDT)

Reverted edit.[edit]

Hey P, I reverted your edit on the Samuel Davion, articles infobox because "Albert Alexander Marik-Davion]] (half-brother)" is a huge monster of a name to fit into an infobox and just looks really untidy as it is stretched across multiple lines within the box.. Maybe it is just me though. Just thought I would let you know.--Dmon (talk) 16:14, 9 September 2018 (EDT)

Umm... but if the information is accurate, then it absolutely belongs there. Will check if I can make it less "untidy". Edit: Ok, I see. Misunderstood the reversal. Forget it, move on, nothing to see here. :) Frabby (talk) 16:24, 9 September 2018 (EDT)

Source for Dennis Blunk?[edit]

Hey Pserratv, just noticed you created a redirect to Spectre (Character) from Dennis Blunk. Two points, first, what is the source of the name? Secondly if we can verify that as the characters name the redirect should go the other way with the article being in the characters actual name rather than his callsign (even though he is best known by his callsign).--Dmon (talk) 20:51, 27 September 2018 (EDT)

We can delete the link. I had read that in a wiki page... but you made me re-read and... it was a mistake. Can we delete the entry?--Pserratv (talk) 03:05, 28 September 2018 (EDT)
Damn and I had my hopes up for nailing down something significant!--Dmon (talk) 03:58, 28 September 2018 (EDT)
I would say shit happens, but what happens is that I need to start reading carefully :). Just a case of bad luck.--Pserratv (talk) 04:29, 28 September 2018 (EDT)

BattleTech Videogame Stuff[edit]

Hi Pserratv,

I noticed you've added a bit of information to some of the planet articles using the new BattleTech video game as the source. I've no issues with this, but can you make sure to tag the information using the apocryphal tags, please? The game is still considered an apocryphal source at the moment, and if the info isn't tagged up, there's the risk of us getting accused of mixing canon and non-canon information up in the articles. Also, if the information refers to a planet (rather than a system) it should go in the planet section of the article - I tweaked Úr Cruinne to show you what I mean; because the information was largely about the climate/geography of Úr Cruinne, I put it in the planetary Geography section, but if it'd been a statement about how long Úr Cruinne had been colonised and how many people lived there, I would've stuck it in the Planetary History section instead, as an example. BrokenMnemonic (talk) 04:02, 2 October 2018 (EDT)

I though I had already used the correct tag on apocryphal, did I miss something? (identifying the source). As for the other comments, I'll review the planets I've already tweaked and amend them.--Pserratv (talk) 06:55, 2 October 2018 (EDT)

Bloodname Holders[edit]

Hi Pere, your project on the Bloodnames is impressive. But I had a thought: Given that the list of bloodname holders is ever-increasing for all but the dead bloodnames, wouldn't a category of Bloodname holders for each bloodname be a better approach? That way you only need to add a category to each bloodnamed character, instead of having to update the Bloodname articles every time. Plus, the sheer number of named bloodname holders for some bloodnames is going to explode the articles sooner or later. Frabby (talk) 16:21, 9 October 2018 (EDT)

When I created the project last year I thought about that.. But either way it ends up as something huge and sprawling. 800 hundred bloodname categories or 800 hundred semi-list bloodname articles. I came to the conclusion that the articles would be more versatile when it comes to adding information about Bloodhouse culture (stuff about bloodchapels etc) with only a few of the major names getting truly silly lists, and that is where we par it back down to notable bloodname holders. Pere has taken over the project though as I have other things I am more interested in so I will leave the ultimate call with him.--Dmon (talk) 18:36, 9 October 2018 (EDT)
Let me express my view. Dmon's comments are perfect, and the information on the bloodhouses is impressive. Though it is true that some bloodnames might explode, this is only going to happen for a few, so my feeling is that there will be no problem. That said, my idea on separating them by rank makes it "easy" enough that if something explodes, we can take out some of the ranks, keeping maybe only ilKhan, Khan, saKhan and Loremasters for example. Now, adding them all also helps (at least to me) to see that some bloodnames might exist, but in the end they haven't been given a lot of attention by the writers, and maybe can help to dig their status. I'm in my phase 1, just digging through the existing sarna database to find bloodname people. I know that some books might skyrocket that number, but not that much (still that is my feeling). Once completed phases 1 and 2, my idea is that while reading books we can add high level information on the chapels and bloodname politics (if any).--Pserratv (talk) 03:35, 10 October 2018 (EDT)


Morning Pserratv. Just wanted to give you this award for your work taking over the Bloodnames project over the last few months and just generally working hard to make the wiki a better place. All Purpose Award, 1st ribbon --Dmon (talk) 05:16, 19 October 2018 (EDT)

Thanks!--Pserratv (talk) 06:08, 19 October 2018 (EDT)

Brian or Bryant[edit]

Hey PS, saw you put in BRIAN Foster in the Meredith's Marauders article.. an anonymous user put the same name in the Atlas article. Do you have a copy of Exodus Road to check? My copy says BRYANT Foster but two people doing the same name has raised some doubts in my mind.--Dmon (talk) 04:31, 31 October 2018 (EDT)

The spanish version says Bryan, but the english one says Bryant (I only checked the spanish that I have quickly at hand). In those cases I always consider we got a bad translation (one of many). I've amended the article accordingly, even giving him a rank as the book says.--Pserratv (talk) 04:44, 31 October 2018 (EDT)
Thanks for the quick response. I am currently reading an electronic copy (English), but think I have a paperback copy I will check. Are badly translated names a common problem in the Spanish versions?--Dmon (talk) 04:59, 31 October 2018 (EDT)
Names is not the worst, it hapens but meaning not often... But on other points there are some errors which are quite big: for example Spanish books says that Damien Redburn pilots a Valkyrie because they incorrect translate the context of the St. Andre battle against Cochraine's Goliaths--Pserratv (talk) 06:10, 31 October 2018 (EDT)

Solaris VII Gladiator[edit]

Hey PS, only a minor one... I have been thinking, "Solaris VII Gladiator" is not really an affiliation (that would be the stables etc), would it not be better to post "Solaris VII Gladiator as a characters profession rather than MechWarrior. Sort of the same was as a military rank or noble title would superceed it as a specific roole.--Dmon (talk) 04:27, 8 November 2018 (EST)

You are right, but I find a problem on this: a lot of these MechWarriors do not have affiliation. And not just older ones, most of the news do not have. So I though to keep them appart, as part of the jungle of Solaris and have them differentiated from the rest. When I was able to give them an affiliation, I'll give that also to them.--Pserratv (talk) 04:33, 8 November 2018 (EST)
I think a lack of proper affiliation is something we will just have to live with. I have found the Dark Age stuff to be a lot less specific than the older stuff. It requires a lot more work to put things together into a useful "bigger pictrure" as it is more a series of individual events, in a similar way to what Warhammer 40k did for many years.--Dmon (talk) 04:42, 8 November 2018 (EST)
Maybe we should create an unknown aligned category for them... not sure. It will be a lot of work, but can be done. It is up to us! We just need a decision. But I would like to have all this characters grouped somewhere... Category per stable is not something I'm inclined to do though. Also, part of setting them as Solaris Caracters was a way to make them "special", maybe that was a mistake.--Pserratv (talk) 04:48, 8 November 2018 (EST)
By the way, the categories are Solaris Games Characters & Solaris Games MechWarriors (& others). The idea is to set them apart because of what they do, like mercenary affiliation.--Pserratv (talk) 04:55, 8 November 2018 (EST)
I think the Solaris Characters category is fine. They are "special" because they are celebrities, they are the Rock Stars of the BTU. So their nationallity or affiliation is less important than it would be with a regular soldier. I think we can get away with having then just in that category without the need for an unknown alignment category as their alignment is to their fan base if that makes sense. If we really want to get specific their profession would be Solaris Gladiator and their alignment is to the Solaris Games but I think that would confuse people.--Dmon (talk) 05:06, 8 November 2018 (EST)
Solaris Gladiator I love it. I think that one would be a very good creation (an upscale version of just mechwarrior), and also able to cover other type of warriors in the arenas. Maybe we should create that entry: "Solaris Gladiator", and change them all to that).--Pserratv (talk) 05:10, 8 November 2018 (EST)
Exactly the direction I was thinking :-)--Dmon (talk) 05:15, 8 November 2018 (EST)
Leaving for a medical appointment. I'll try to do it after I'm back :)--Pserratv (talk) 05:18, 8 November 2018 (EST)
It's going to be Arena Gladiator so it can cover also other planets gladiators and not just Solaris (for example Noisiel)
Good call now you mention it.--Dmon (talk) 09:31, 8 November 2018 (EST)
Done, Arena Gladiator created. It is still something that can be enhanced. I'll try to find ways, but please anybody can work on that.--Pserratv (talk) 09:50, 8 November 2018 (EST)


Morning Pserratv (or what ever time it is where you are),

As one of a crop of new editors on the wiki I would like your thoughts on something that has knock on effects about handling future new products. How we handle new products.--Dmon (talk) 05:46, 28 November 2018 (EST)

Done--Pserratv (talk) 06:10, 28 November 2018 (EST)

Captain vs. captain[edit]


regarding your recent edit to the E.F. Marie article: Please keep in mind that "captain" can be a military rank or a function (the "boss" of a ship), both in the real world and in the BT universe. This wouldn't normally warrant an article being written, but because of the numerous fictional militaries in the BT universe there is actually an article on Captain.

However, the E.F. Marie is a nonmilitary ship; "captain" is just a function aboard the ship and not a military rank. Therefore, I didn't link it to the "Captain" article. Inserting the link like you did gives the impression that the military rank is meant, which isn't the case.

That's why I removed the link again. Frabby (talk) 10:49, 4 December 2018 (EST)

OK, point taken. Maybe a captain article would be needed.--Pserratv (talk) 11:04, 4 December 2018 (EST)
Captaining a ship is not a noteworthy or BattleTech-specific thing though. It's a commonplace real-world thing. Why would it need an article on Frabby (talk) 11:49, 4 December 2018 (EST)
It was an idea. Maybe we should say something like acting-Captain or something like this.--Pserratv (talk) 12:01, 4 December 2018 (EST)

Bibliography Links[edit]

Hi Pere, it's me again with a request: When creating articles, please make sure that all sources used as a reference appear in the Bibliography section (there may be special cases where that's not neccessary but it's good as a general rule), and that all entries in the Bibliography section are article links.

I am raising this point because of the new stables you added. They refer to The Season at Rankar's Deep as source, but there is no link. That makes is difficult for users to check the referenced source(s). It's okay if the cited source is a redlink (then we all know the article needs to be written); but it should always be a link.

That said, I'm happy to see your diligent work on Solaris VII and related topics. I think a Tireless Contributor award is in order. Tireless Contributor Award, 1st ribbon Keep it up, we need a S7 expert here! Frabby (talk) 15:26, 10 December 2018 (EST)

Glad you said it Frabby... The Season at Rankar's Deep is a new one to me and was about to ask what it is.--Dmon (talk) 18:06, 10 December 2018 (EST)


Hey P,

I was kinda working through the clan characters purposefully leaving the ones without info boxes alone to come back too once all the other ones have been moved so I could do two birds with one stone!!!!!!--Dmon (talk) 07:10, 11 December 2018 (EST)

I'll stop then... I was seeing you just elimianted the Clan link... I'll review the ones changed by me that have that rule and I'll leave them where they are.--Pserratv (talk) 07:11, 11 December 2018 (EST)
Thanks, I know you where helping, just threw off what I was doing. Also as a separate thing.. Have you found a way to access the old BattleCorps news stuff?--Dmon (talk) 07:16, 11 December 2018 (EST)
Not at this moment... will have to retry, maybe in some russian site... if I had Thor maybe I could...--Pserratv (talk) 07:16, 11 December 2018 (EST)
Damn again! There is some really good stuff on there that has at the moment seemingly been lost!--Dmon (talk) 07:59, 11 December 2018 (EST)
I'll keep searching. By the way, now you have in Clan Characters only the ones that don't have infobox. Hope it helps.--Pserratv (talk) 08:00, 11 December 2018 (EST)
Thank you. You are an absolute machine!--Dmon (talk) 08:08, 11 December 2018 (EST)
If you need the BattleCorps newsfeed articles, I have them all archived.--Mendrugo (talk) 12:06, 11 December 2018 (EST)
I would love to have them all, how can I contact you?--Pserratv (talk) 12:15, 11 December 2018 (EST) (talk) 12:16, 11 December 2018 (EST)
Thanks!--Pserratv (talk) 12:24, 11 December 2018 (EST)

Manual of Style[edit]

Hi P, thank you for the awesome data-mining in the old INN archives. I'd like to bring your attention to two style points that I've noticed in your new articles:

  • In its first mentioning, the ship name should be both bolded and italicized (five apostrophes, three for bold and two for italics). In the following text it isn't bolded anymore but individual ship names as well as ship classes (also 'Mechs, ProtoMechs and aerospace fighter classes but not vehicles or battlearmor) should always be italicized.
  • When quoting a source either in a reference or in the Bibliography section, quote the source (BattleTech product/publication) and not an article or header within the source. For example, in the Bison article you quoted "Mystery Ships Battle In Nusakan System". This is not a BattleTech product. The proper reference would be something like BattleCorps: INN Newscast (Solaris Broadcasting Co. section), news item published [insert in-universe date]: "Mystery Ships Battle In Nusakan System". The same should go in the Bibliography section. Frabby (talk) 14:47, 18 December 2018 (EST)

I'll try to amend them all, starting with dropships and jumpships.--Pserratv (talk) 16:01, 18 December 2018 (EST)