Editing Category talk:Inner Sphere Standard BattleMechs


I would think IS General Battlemechs and IS Battlemechs would be distinct subsets; with IS General covering mechs available to all factions and IS Battlemechs covering all mechs including faction specific ones.{{Unsigned|73.140.154.170|12:07, 20 February 2021‎ }}
:The issue is that the BattleMech faction categories are not meant to be an availability chart, they are who manufactures the BattleMechs, so "General BattleMechs" simply does not exist. For a real world analogy, A Toyota Camry does not stop being considered a Japanese car because you can buy one in America or Europe.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:20, 20 February 2021 (EST)

== Where even IS the IS Battlemech category? ==

I can't find the alternate list that's been proposed. Where even is it? It doesn't pop when searched in the wiki nor from Google. This page helps because, well, it exists.{{unsigned|64.121.204.146|08:45, 9 April 2021‎‎}}

==Deletion==
I rolled back the prior edit that removed the deletion tags without discussion. Deletion was suggested by an editor, so I feel it should be discussed.

That being said, I vote no on deletion. I feel Omni/Standard/Industrial categories for both Clan and IS tech base are useful.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 18:15, 15 October 2021 (EDT)

:No on deletion. This has been sitting here for quite some time and there does not seem to be strong support for deleting and some good arguments against it.  I will say more on [[Category talk:Standard BattleMechs]].--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 10:55, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

::If these are kept, then the qualifier "tech" absolutely needs to be added. Personally, though, I vote for deletion. Otherwise units will increasingly be added to both lists as MixedTech or Clan builds of classic IS designs are introduced (eg: Rifleman C 3, Warhammer C 3, BattleMaster C 3, etc. etc). Plus, the MUL can already filter by techbase/omni or not/factional usage, and doesn't need constant maintenance with each product release to make sure the categories are up to date. --[[User:GreekFire|GreekFire]] ([[User talk:GreekFire|talk]]) 11:08, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

:::You make a good point about the tech qualifier, yes.  The argument about factional usage is distinct from "Standard/Omni/Industrial", which is what these categories address--though they are addressed in other categories that have been contentious in the past.--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 11:40, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
::::I am yet to figure out what this category does that is different from [[:Category:Inner Sphere BattleMechs]].--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 12:28, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

:::::There are Inner Sphere Standard (fixed equipment) and Omni designs.  Same with Clan, though the ratio is skewed the other way.--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 12:30, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
:::::"This a listing of BattleMechs using the Inner Sphere technology base which are neither OmniMechs nor IndustrialMechs." from the category description.--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 12:31, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

::::::But a 'Mech using the Inner Sphere technology base which is neither OmniMechs nor IndustrialMechs is an Inner Sphere BattleMech.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 12:40, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

:::::::That is correct, it is.  However, all of these are also Inner Sphere BattleMechs: [[:Category:Inner Sphere OmniMechs]].  "Standard" was the default for Inner Sphere Mechs through the Succession Wars and the first part of the Clan Invasion, but that is changing.  I understand your frustration with the categories, and you know I would be happy to scrap 90% of these, but I am a voice crying out in the wilderness on that point.  So I am trying to find a workable compromise.  See the talk page for this category's parent category for more of my thoughts.--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 12:51, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

:::::::OK, I did not understand that there are subcategories for Standard and Omni and Industrial under Inner Sphere BattleMechs.  That *does* change my perspective, yes.  We have duplication of effort, here.  Which category tree do we want to save?--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 12:58, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
:I would look at the idea of switching out [[:Category:BattleMechs]] to a more universal [[:Category:Mechs]], with either three tech based subcategories (BM, Omni, IM) or six subcategories and further sort them into Clan or IS.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:10, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

::I could live with that.--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 13:16, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

:::I suggest a pause while this is dealt with, and then we can move what is becoming a much broader discussion to the proper place: [[BattleTechWiki talk:Project BattleMechs#Archive.2C_and_move_current_discussions_here.]] --[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 17:04, 21 June 2022 (EDT)

== This Category is under two other categories. ==

I think I see where some of the confusion is coming from:<br>
This category is, itself, under two other categories.  [[:Category:Standard BattleMechs]] and [[:Category:Inner Sphere BattleMechs]].  Standard BattleMechs is listed for deletion.  This category is listed for deletion.  Inner Sphere BattleMechs is not.  I believe the current trend is to have a "tree" organization without that kind of overlap.  Perhaps we need to remove [[:Category:Standard BattleMechs]], pull deletion from this, and get every non-category page under [[:Category:Inner Sphere BattleMechs]] into Standard, Omni, Industrial, or if both Standard and Omni versions are noted on the same page, both. (Not sure if any such exist.)

Or do we want to go the other direction?  In any case, having both meta-categories, with individual pages as well as categories under each, feels like too much.--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 13:07, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
:Spot on about the intention for category trees to not overlap.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:16, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
@@ Line 40: / Line 40: @@
 Or do we want to go the other direction?  In any case, having both meta-categories, with individual pages as well as categories under each, feels like too much.--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 13:07, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
 :Spot on about the intention for category trees to not overlap.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:16, 21 June 2022 (EDT)
-== Moving the discussions ==
-[[BattleTechWiki talk:Project BattleMechs]] is a better place to discuss a topic that appears to span multiple categories and venues of discussion.--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 19:23, 22 June 2022 (EDT)