User talk:Mbear

Something you want to say? Just let me know!

User_talk:Mbear/archived

Citing BV & template

Policy_Talk:Canon#Citing_BV: looks like your idea has sparked support. Can you pls respond? --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 18:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Hy Mbear i post a little link *Master Unit List.pdf, i hope it is helpfull.--Doneve 20:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Objectiv raids 3067

Hy Mbear, I find a pdf created from fans. This book contains all available information about parts and products for the entire is military. What are you thinking. Can i use this information for some projects in the future or not.
The link for this pdf is:
http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,7014.msg159695.html#msg159695
and for the sub articles:
Neuling 20:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Hy Mbear i removed the added links from Neuling, there not relevant.Doneve 20:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Neuling the short answer is "No." Please see the Objective Raids: 3067 page. It describes the reason for not using the file.--Mbear 13:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Cloud Nine & Ten

Hi Mbear, i just wrote up the Cloud Nine Carrier Airship article from the TRO: Vehicle Annex. I wrote it as a prelude to when Cloud Ten becames available to become a article. However, i wanted bounce idea to you that the Cloud Ten should be its own article instead of written up as a variant since it has considerable amount of text and features in comparison to Cloud Nine. -- Wrangler 19:03, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the Cloud Ten should get it's own article. In fact, there's a link on the XTRO:Boondocks page expressly for the Cloud Ten. You could put a "related designs" header on the page (Like on the Duan Gung page).--Mbear 20:09, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

VAL-NT-JX "Hot Knife"

Hi Mbear, i just you post the variant for the Valiant. Question, what version of the Valiant is this variant suppose to be based on? Not sound picky, there least two base models being produced two seperate succession states. -- Wrangler 15:09, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Based on the name (JX) I assume it's based on the J3 model. I've updated the page to reflect that.--Mbear 15:11, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Slide In/Slide Out Equipment

Hi Mbear, i'm was looking to write up small article regarding this pre-OmniModule system that used in Support Vehicles called Slide In/Slide Out or SISO. I've Scanned/looked in TechManual and the didn't find any listing for the thing. Do you know where i would find actual listing on it? -- Wrangler 14:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

IIRC, the SISO was mentioned in Technical Readout: Vehicle Annex, not the TechManual. It was one of the research vehicles, but now I can't remember which one. Sorry!--Mbear 16:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Its in two vehicles so far from what i've found. Cortez Exploration vehicle and the Mosquito radar plane. There no construction rules regarding them which is kind frustrating since these is a pre-quer to OmniMech/OmniVehicle designs. It IS a piece of equipment. It does not say how much equipment is suppose to be able to handle. TacOps, TechManual do not have anything on it. I'll keep looking. -- Wrangler 16:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Another possibility is the Mercury battlemech. It was the precursor to the Omnimech, so maybe some of the same info applies to the SISO.--Mbear 16:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

So far from what i've looked into, its never been named having the SISO. It was a completely new thing. Thinking about it, the SOSI likely to be precursor to OmniVehicles instead. -- Wrangler 17:45, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I've gotten word from the Battletech writer, Cray. He has said that the SISO is a fluff system has no solid mechanics in the game. There maybe rules for it StratOps, but SISO isn't mentioned in the book. Should we bother SISO and possibly other such fluff equipment in a list some where like the List of Minor Merc units? -- Wrangler 19:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't bother. I see the SISO system as being similar to the Mercury 'Mech's "modular repair system": It's a neat bit of fluff and really handy for the Techs fixing things, but it doesn't affect game play or require any rules.--Mbear 19:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Jade Falcon Incursion and Dominion Wars

Hi Mbear, I have two little project: First the JFI which is in progress and Second the DW. What are you thinking about it and give me advice when needed. Neuling 18:38, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

You've got some good stuff on the Jade Falcon Incursion. I've only two suggestions:

1. Cite your sources/Add references that others can use.
2. Add links to the planets, units, etc. in the article (but you're probably doing this already)

Other than that, good work.--Mbear 18:46, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Blocking Mortiorum work

Hi Mbear, other day scrambled to put up a Mortiorum volation notice on the Arbiter article. I do not normally do that sort of thing so i wasn't sure what to do. How do you temporary, block text like it is now? Its not blanking, but i'm not sure how to do it or how to put correct template on there note that someone violated the Mort. -- Wrangler 16:13, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

To hide the information from view, the editor put standard HTML comment tags around the content they wanted to blank out. These tags tell the web browser to ignore anything between them.

To start an HTML comment, hit the edit page and then place <!-- before the stuff you want to disappear. To close the HTML comment (stop hiding stuff) use the --> tag. Here's a sample (hit the section edit link to see how it works):

I'm not sure if hiding the text is the correct procedure, or if I should delete the page. I'll have to check with the other admins.--Mbear 16:29, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually I just re-read the Policy:Moratorium and it says that commenting out is the correct procedure. There's also some info there.--Mbear 16:36, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Spam link

Hy Mbear, can you look at user 94.76.113.176 he add a spam link to the Sandbox, i deleted the link.--Doneve 12:05, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Faction 3067

Hy Mbear, what are you thinking about my latest work about the Dominion Wars and the work about an update to all know factions inclusive mercs. Neuling 21:42, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Neuling, you've got a lot of info about 3067 deployments on the DCMS page. I don't think that's the right place for them. I'd put them instead on the unit pages.

The problem with putting the 3067 deployment on the main DCMS page is simple: Pretty soon you'd have to add information for the Age of War, First Succession War, etc., which is going to create a massive page. Instead I'd put the information you have here on the specific page for the unit, year, or event. (If we're missing an event, go ahead and add it.) That way we can keep the page size manageable.

Another problem with putting stuff on the main DCMS page is that it will quickly get lost (people will have a hard time finding it). This is good info, and if you put it on the unit/event/year page it won't get lost in a big page.--Mbear 12:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

For at least trying to resolve the Notable Pilots mess

Mbear - I don't know if we'll adopt your proposal, but I respect you made a strong attempt at setting up a compromise. As I don't have the authority to grant you a more prestigious award, I offer you the : Thanks! ClanWolverine101 15:02, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!--Mbear 15:17, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Satellite Support Vehicles

Hi Mbear, i recently added first satellite support vehicle article. When i went to use the template for Support Vehicles, i found it inproperate for use for such a space bound vehicle. I used the infobox from the small craft instead. I'm not sure, if that or the space station infobox should be used. I did notice though through my number of support vehicle articles, that we need new template for the Support Vehicles. Can you look into this? I noticed one thing, that speed of vehicle comes up twice in article for some reason. I noticed in yours and Rev templates, that you can code the template to make certain selection in the info box to disappear from view so a empty slot doesn't show. Can this be done? Should I ask Rev about it? Thanks -- Wrangler 14:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The short answer is I can look into it (speed appearing twice), but I probably won't be able to get to it until later today (about 6 or 7 PM EST). If you provide me an example I can look at I'll be happy to see if I can figure out why this is happening.

For the second part of your comment it sounds like you're asking for:

1. A new template page for support vehicles, which should have a new infobox as well.
2. A new infobox for satellite support vehicles.

Is that correct?--Mbear 19:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

LOL

Sorry, but i must laugh for the deletion tag of the Tai-shu, (you spend so much energy in the military ranks, and you forgot it ;), i must bring a little bit humor on the talk page, then in last time the "HEAT" discussion of the Notable or able or or was very impressive.) Thanks for your cool coment when you add the data (Added a lot of informations.) You have earnded a hot strong coffee from me. --Doneve 16:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, when I saw that Tai-shu deletion tag I felt pretty foolish. Of course there are 182 military ranks listed in the wiki now, so maybe I can be forgiven for missing one of them.

Thanks for the coffee, but my doctor says I have to avoid dark fluids. Could I get a Sprite instead?--Mbear 16:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Absolutly, i am the cooffee master, (please look on my Doneve page), then you understand, a little coffee picture by myself.--Doneve 16:27, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

ÄHHMMM

Hy Mbear, Record Sheets: 3058 Unabridged (Clan & Star League) falls under the moratorium, take a look on RS page.Greetings--Doneve 14:35, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

D'oh! Totally forgot about the Moratorium. Thanks for stopping me in time!--Mbear 14:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about forgetting to put the Moratorium both pages. -- Wrangler 16:48, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I wasn't confused: I was testing you. Yeah! That's it! I was testing you. You passed! Congratulations! --Mbear 16:57, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

--Doneve 18:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Update needed Tags

Mbear - Question : I appreciate the amount of work you've put in going through all those commands. But isn't this a bit excessive? Some of the articles now have more than five tags. ClanWolverine101 13:42, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it is excessive. Many of these commands just sat there with a stub tag for ages. By adding the relevant update needed tags, I hope that editors can see each relevant reference book. This will give them a head start on updating the article.--Mbear 15:32, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Tikonov Republican Guards

Hi Mbear. Why did you change the name of the Republican regiments? Most of the source books have them listed as (no.) Republicans, not Tikonov Republican Guards. Thats going be bit confusing for alot of folks. I know name not terribly popular but changing them going be rather confusing for people in long run. -- Wrangler 10:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I changed them because

1. the FCCW book called them the Tikonov Republican Guards.
2. the Rim Worlds Republic's units were also called Republicans.

If you want to change them back, feel free. I've no objection.--Mbear 11:26, 8 July 2010 (UTC)