Talk:BattleTech: The Animated Series

Revision as of 06:21, 7 October 2011 by Neufeld (talk | contribs) (canon and the animated series fluffed as an in-universe product.)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Canonical errors[edit]

Could we please link to the website that the list of canonical errors comes from? I know I've seen it floating around, but I don't have the time to go find it myself. --Scaletail 20:59, 30 June 2008 (CDT)

Take a look at the section now. Does that seem more in keeping with the spirit of [BWT]? (Found the site by Googling the first line.) --Revanche (talk|contribs) 10:19, 2 July 2008 (CDT)
The content in itself isn't the problem. The question is that you should specify all that contents' origin to respect the copyright of the work done. Just add a link to the page where you found all that stuff. --FIVE-one 10:22, 2 July 2008 (CDT)
FASA tried to correctly canonize the events via the sourcebook on the 1st Somerset Strikers which I recently acquired. It is my only source of info, as I have never seen the series. In the "Canonicity" section I was going to explain what definitively is canon (as it is confirmed in the sourcebook), how they tweaked and retconned around the edges to fit the whole thing into established canon, and what probably remains non-canon. Work is far from complete yet, and the main article only half done so far. I shall continue if and when I have time (shortly I hope). Btw many perceived canonicity problems are being adressed. Frabby 12:07, 2 July 2008 (CDT)
FIVE-one, I was just following the request of Scaletail above. I'm not the originator of the material whatsoever (nor even a fan of the animated series). --Revanche (talk|contribs) 14:06, 2 July 2008 (CDT)
Well, this message wasn't adressed especialy to you, but a good maneuver would have been to simply add a link to the original page. It's all what I was trying to advise. --FIVE-one 14:13, 2 July 2008 (CDT)
Ah, ok: you were saying you agreed with my change. Sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying. However, might I suggest making additional changes with the wiki terms I've employed in your two recent continutity error additions? It'll make it easier to read the content. See, by using the pound sign (#) at the beginning of the line, it will automatically number the added errors. Also, note how I created a link to TRO:3050, without having to repeat the term "Technical Readout). Cheers. --Revanche (talk|contribs) 06:25, 3 July 2008 (CDT)
Better than I suggested! I just wanted to avoid any issues of plagiarism by giving credit, as I knew this was not original to BTW. --Scaletail 19:17, 2 July 2008 (CDT)

More on canon status[edit]

Since The Animated Series has in recent publications (M&M, ER:3052, WoR) been fluffed as an in-universe product, should it be promoted to canon status? --Neufeld 10:21, 7 October 2011 (UTC)