Editing Talk:Word of Blake

{{WikiProject Factions|tr=new}}
{{WikiProject UnfinishedBook}}
==Shot & Killed Waterly==
*I have my doubts about this edit. I suspect I may be allowing a non-NPOV edit in by only <nowiki>{{cn}}-</nowiki>ing it. For some reason, I thought the [[ComStar (sourcebook)|ComStar sourcebook]] suggested she died a (coincidentally) natural death. While there are doubts as to the legitimacy of that reported death, unless it was specifically reported that she was shot & killed, then its all a guess. (She may have been poisoned or thrown down some stairs, if she ''was'' assassinated.) In any case, I'm gonna leave the <nowiki>{{cn}}</nowiki> there for now, until I come across something solidly one way or the other. But, if anyone wanted to edit it to state that her death was reported as a natural one, but suspected of being fouled, then I'd have little complaint. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] 18:37, 3 February 2007 (CST)
:Hm. I don't remember where I read it, but in one of the PDFs I have, I think it says she was murdered. I was actually going to bring this up on the talk page because, much like you, I'm far from certain. It might not even be from one of my PDFs, come to think of it. It may have been mentioned through one of the games or a site on da intarwubs. --[[User:Xoid|Xoid]] 19:37, 3 February 2007 (CST)
::And it may have been said she was murdered in something canon, as you said. I just think that both sources (ComStar on one side and the other source on the other) would be written from a non-NPOV. I just dislike the idea that its unequivically stated that she was shot. I really need a source to believe that. (Is it just me, or is this possibly the first 'real' discusion on BTW as to how to improve a specific article, rather than then whole wiki itself...cool, huh?) --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] 20:18, 3 February 2007 (CST)
:::It's the first one where there wasn't an obvious course of action to fix it, so instead of one of us regulars coming up with a good idea and everyone going "yup, sure", we're forced to actually talk about it. This isn't really discussion about improving the article per se, at this point in time, more commenting on the fact that we've hit our first snag ("''er… which one was it?''", "''Dunno.''").
:::Now, to actual discussion. :P
:::I believe that both points of view should be mentioned, and that if there is a clear 'favourite' opinion amongst canon characters that ''that'' should be noted. --[[User:Xoid|Xoid]] 21:53, 3 February 2007 (CST)
:::"Upon the defeat of the Clans at Tukayyid at the hands of ComStar, Precentor Martial Anastasius Focht returned to Terra to confront then Primus Myndo Waterly about her Operation Scorpion, an attempt to turn the entire Inner Sphere over to the Clans and shot and killed Waterly.[citation needed]"
::::The edit made it more obvious, but even before hand the sentence was a run-on. I suggest the following:
::::"Upon the defeat of the Clans at Tukayyid at the hands of ComStar, Precentor Martial Anastasius Focht returned to Terra to confront then Primus Myndo Waterly about her Operation Scorpion, an attempt to turn the entire Inner Sphere over to the Clans. While there is no clear understanding how Waterly actually died, ComStar historical archives indicate the Primus suffered a cerebral hemmorrhage only four days after she was forced to resign her position. Word of Blake intercepts forcefully state that Focht had her killed in order to secure the power of her position." <nowiki><ref>'' [[ComStar (sourcebook)|ComStar]]'' (1992), [[FASA]], pp 74.</ref></nowiki> {{unsigned|Revanche}}
:::::Seems reasonable enough to me. Don't worry about it being imperfect; it's good enough for now. --[[User:Xoid|Xoid]] 02:58, 4 February 2007 (CST)
::::::Thanks (for the sig, too). I'll go ahead and make the change. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] 10:10, 4 February 2007 (CST)
:::::::From re-listening to my audiobook copy of the third '''Blood of Kerensky''' novel ''Lost Destiny'' it seems pretty clear that Focht shot Waterly in the back, but since other sources (such as the ComStar sourcebook) indicate otherwise, it should be left in as the apparent cover-up of Waterly's death is one of the major bones of contention between the two factions. --[[User:Basara|Basara]] 14:52, 10 February 2007 (CST)
::::::::Aha! See, now, you do have a more ''reliable'', canon source, in my mind. If the narration is [[w:Third-person narrative|third-person]] omniscient/dramatic or objective, then this is what /did/ happen, rather than how some person recounted it, such as with first- or second-person. The sourcebooks are written from a third-person objective style, but I'd judge that they weren't truly objective since they're compiled from an in-character source. If you can reference the book, then I'd say re-write it stating that she was killed when shot in the back, but ComStar maintains she resigned and died four days later. [[Link title]]
:::::::::Well, I happen to own the (german translation) of the Michael A. Stackpole novel "Lost Destiny", and it describes the scene were Prima Myndo Waterly is shot (twice) by Praezentor Martialum Anastasius Focht. The scene even dwells further in "secrets", as Focht confronts the present Sharila Mori, accusing her of espionage for the Draconis Combine, which she admits to. Nevertheless he refuses to kill her for treason and recruits her to assist him with his dream of reforming ComStar (rationalizing it by his perceved lack of political skills which she should compensate).
::::::::::The [[Intelligence Operations Handbook]], written by [[Wolfnet]], directly quotes part of that speech as well as stating Focht shot Waterly. The Focht portion of the Blake/Waterly/Focht/Blane diary side-bar towards the back of the [[BattleTech Compendium: Rules of Warfare]] also indicates he shot her. [[User:Cyc|Cyc]] 15:25, 17 February 2009 (PST)
:::::::::::Well, after some canon sources, proofing that Waterly indeed was shot by Focht, were cited, shall we make the edit?

==BattleTech 3056 MUSE==
*There were several articles that had been located in Sarna's databases before BTW were established and, IIRC, they state authorship as belonging to "BattleTech 3056 MUSE," such as this one currently does. However, since there have been now two edits to the article, and per the ownerless nature of wikis, I suggest we remove these statements as we come across them, but especially for this one. Thoughts? --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] 10:17, 4 February 2007 (CST)
:I was assuming that it's saying the text was directly ripped from some book named MUSE or some-such. In which case the attribution is important. Yet again, I'm far from certain. --[[User:Xoid|Xoid]] 11:02, 4 February 2007 (CST)
::Okay, I'll contact Nic. He'll know the source and we can proceed from there. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 11:39, 4 February 2007 (CST)
:::I'm fairly certain the text here was a copy of text that was 'floating' around the internet back in the day (5+ years ago), whose original author was someone on the Btech 3056 MUSE.  I'm not certain who there it was.  Maybe we can just put it as a footnote that we think that is where it came from and if anyone has more info please update the source? [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] 12:57, 4 February 2007 (CST)
::::Sure; sounds like a good idea. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 15:13, 4 February 2007 (CST)

== WoB Warship Origins ==

Anyone know how WoB obtained so many warships?

:They subverted the crews of the Free Worlds League ships and discovered the Ruins of Gabriel, which apparently had a lot of mothballed ships... or something. Start [http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/topic,1478.0.html here] and [http://forums.classicbattletech.com/index.php/topic,661.0.html here] for theories. [[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 09:38, 19 September 2007 (CDT)

::They also reportedly with their yardships were able to recover and restore warships that had been destroyed in the Periphery Uprising and the War Against the Usurper prior to the fall of the Star League.{{unsigned|172.90.88.102|21:08, 22 May 2021‎}}

== "WoB" ==

I would like to propose that it is, for the most part, inappropriate to use the term "WoB" in an actual article. There may be specific canon instances where the expression is used, and that's fine. Outside of those articles, however, WoB should only be used in talk/discussion pages. Do people disagree? [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 06:33, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
:I have no objection to that. There's plenty of other abbreviations to use. --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 00:22, 10 December 2010 (UTC)