Editing User talk:BobTheZombie
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision
Your text
Line 2:
Line 2: *''[[User talk:BobTheZombie/2014 Archive|2014 Archive]]'' *''[[User talk:BobTheZombie/2014 Archive|2014 Archive]]'' *''[[User talk:BobTheZombie/2015 Archive|2015 Archive]]'' *''[[User talk:BobTheZombie/2015 Archive|2015 Archive]]'' − *''[[User talk:BobTheZombie/2016-2017 Archive|2016-2017 Archive]]'' {{_TOC_}} {{_TOC_}} ==Proofreading== ==Proofreading== Line 12:
Line 11: *[[3rd Tikonov Guards]] *[[3rd Tikonov Guards]] *[[Spidermech]] *[[Spidermech]] − *[[Lucien Davion (23rd c.)|Lucien Davion]] + *[[Lucien Davion]] *[[Huntress (BattleMech)]] *[[Huntress (BattleMech)]] *[[History]] *[[History]] Line 18:
Line 17: {{Welcome|BobTheZombie|}} {{Welcome|BobTheZombie|}} − == Image Categories == + == For your consideration - Epsilon Regiment (Wolf's Dragoons) == − Hi BobTheZombie,+ BTZ - [[Epsilon Regiment (Wolf's Dragoons)]] has been re-written. I want you to know i accepted your critique of my Beta Regiment article (posted back in 2013), to heart. As such, this article is about 40 percent shorter, where i trimmed and summarized a lot of redundant material. I feel the end product is superior, and hope others will find it so. At some point, i will go back and perform the needed revisions to Beta Regiment and the other Dragoon articles. But please give Epsilon a look and let me know. Thank you. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] ([[User talk:ClanWolverine101|talk]]) 12:59, 16 April 2016 (PDT) − Do you know how the system maps are generated? All those images don't have a category and this makes the [https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Special:UncategorizedFiles Uncategorized files] not very useful as from the first 1000 thousand maybe 95% images as these ones. And I do not want to put them in a category as this might affect the "program" that generates them. Do you know who can help? Maybe when the image is generated it can be put in a category like "System Images". I'm asking more people, but do you have any idea?--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 10:40, 10 March 2021 (EST)+ == Clan Smoke Jaguar Minor Characters == − == Dates in title articles ==+ I noticed your comment that you think the article needs a lot of work. I spent a lot of time on that page and am wondering what you think is wrong with it? [[User:Dark Jaguar|Dark Jaguar]] ([[User talk:Dark Jaguar|talk]]) 10:26, 29 May 2016 (PDT) + :I didn't say there was a lot wrong with it, I just thought I saw something grammatical near the end that could be fixed so I wanted to check back on it later. Perhaps it was nothing. I put that tag (and the comment that I "will come back and work on") when I see something to possibly proofread later. Sorry for the confusion. -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 10:54, 29 May 2016 (PDT) + :: Ok, its just normally I've seen that tag used when the page is so bad it requires a complete rewrite! [[User:Dark Jaguar|Dark Jaguar]] ([[User talk:Dark Jaguar|talk]]) 11:18, 29 May 2016 (PDT) + :::The way I use it, it can range from "Needs to be proofread because I found a couple things and didn't have the time" to "Oh no this is very bad". Yours was obviously the former; don't worry, you're doing great :) It's awesome to see you around again and it's great to be back. -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 11:37, 29 May 2016 (PDT) + ::::The template actually generates a message at the top of the page that says "more detail is available on the article talk page" - it presumes that if the reason for the tag isn't obvious, then information will be in the talk page explaining what the issue is. To avoid the risk of confusion (or, in all honesty, feelings getting hurt unintentionally) I'd recommend making use of the talk page just to flag up why the tag has gone on the main article page - that way it'll be a lot easier to see if someone means "this article is terrible and needs to be rewritten" rather than "the grammar in paragraph 57 of 100 needs a bit of tweaking". [[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 02:54, 1 June 2016 (PDT) + :::::Yeah that's good thinking; I always try to explain in my edit summary what I intended with it, namely the "will come back and work on", which just means grammar stuff. For bigger formatting/rewriting I usually put something else in the summary or <-- --> comment it in the article what needs to be addressed. I intend to go through all the {cleanup} tagged pages and proofread all of them, but that'll take a long time... + :::::P.S. I'm back sooner than expected :) -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 19:15, 1 June 2016 (PDT) − Hey Bob,+ == Blackjack == + Hi Bob,<br> − I saw you adding wikilinks into the dates in title articles. + I'm doing my usual morning poke around, and I noticed your amendment to the Blackjack article base don the dev-level errata issued. When you're updating an article based on errata or ATW comments from the CGL forum, can you make sure to quote the forum text in either the notes page of the article or on the article talk page, please? The CGL forums have been wiped at least twice, so if we don't keep a copy of the text here and it happens again, no-one will be able to substantiate the amendment, and it could lead to us being accused of writing fanon again.[[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 00:24, 2 June 2016 (PDT) − + :Oops, I was rushed last night - it's been updated. -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 09:20, 2 June 2016 (PDT) − the way the wikilinks have been done has actually been done on purpose. It just appears a little messed up in articles where we do not have full lines of succession. − − Ideally a chart would look like this, with no date being "double-linked". − * Founder [[3030]] - [[3040]] − * 2nd Leader 3040 - [[3050]] − * 3rd Leader 3050 - [[3060]] − * 4th Leader 3060 - [[3070]] − * 5th Leader 3070 - [[3080]] − * Last Leader 3080 - [[3090]] − − Hope this makes sense.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 16:02, 21 February 2022 (EST) − − :Ah, that does, I was sprinting through, so thanks for catching me. I thought it was a more kosher to have redundant links in lists than in the article, but I'll watch a little closer when I'm messing with that {{emoticon|:)}} -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 16:25, 21 February 2022 (EST)
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
*''[[User talk:BobTheZombie/2014 Archive|2014 Archive]]'' | *''[[User talk:BobTheZombie/2014 Archive|2014 Archive]]'' | ||
*''[[User talk:BobTheZombie/2015 Archive|2015 Archive]]'' | *''[[User talk:BobTheZombie/2015 Archive|2015 Archive]]'' | ||
| − | |||
{{_TOC_}} | {{_TOC_}} | ||
==Proofreading== | ==Proofreading== | ||
| Line 12: | Line 11: | ||
*[[3rd Tikonov Guards]] | *[[3rd Tikonov Guards]] | ||
*[[Spidermech]] | *[[Spidermech]] | ||
| − | *[[ | + | *[[Lucien Davion]] |
*[[Huntress (BattleMech)]] | *[[Huntress (BattleMech)]] | ||
*[[History]] | *[[History]] | ||
| Line 18: | Line 17: | ||
{{Welcome|BobTheZombie|}} | {{Welcome|BobTheZombie|}} | ||
| − | == | + | == For your consideration - Epsilon Regiment (Wolf's Dragoons) == |
| − | + | BTZ - [[Epsilon Regiment (Wolf's Dragoons)]] has been re-written. I want you to know i accepted your critique of my Beta Regiment article (posted back in 2013), to heart. As such, this article is about 40 percent shorter, where i trimmed and summarized a lot of redundant material. I feel the end product is superior, and hope others will find it so. At some point, i will go back and perform the needed revisions to Beta Regiment and the other Dragoon articles. But please give Epsilon a look and let me know. Thank you. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] ([[User talk:ClanWolverine101|talk]]) 12:59, 16 April 2016 (PDT) | |
| − | + | == Clan Smoke Jaguar Minor Characters == | |
| − | + | I noticed your comment that you think the article needs a lot of work. I spent a lot of time on that page and am wondering what you think is wrong with it? [[User:Dark Jaguar|Dark Jaguar]] ([[User talk:Dark Jaguar|talk]]) 10:26, 29 May 2016 (PDT) | |
| + | :I didn't say there was a lot wrong with it, I just thought I saw something grammatical near the end that could be fixed so I wanted to check back on it later. Perhaps it was nothing. I put that tag (and the comment that I "will come back and work on") when I see something to possibly proofread later. Sorry for the confusion. -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 10:54, 29 May 2016 (PDT) | ||
| + | :: Ok, its just normally I've seen that tag used when the page is so bad it requires a complete rewrite! [[User:Dark Jaguar|Dark Jaguar]] ([[User talk:Dark Jaguar|talk]]) 11:18, 29 May 2016 (PDT) | ||
| + | :::The way I use it, it can range from "Needs to be proofread because I found a couple things and didn't have the time" to "Oh no this is very bad". Yours was obviously the former; don't worry, you're doing great :) It's awesome to see you around again and it's great to be back. -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 11:37, 29 May 2016 (PDT) | ||
| + | ::::The template actually generates a message at the top of the page that says "more detail is available on the article talk page" - it presumes that if the reason for the tag isn't obvious, then information will be in the talk page explaining what the issue is. To avoid the risk of confusion (or, in all honesty, feelings getting hurt unintentionally) I'd recommend making use of the talk page just to flag up why the tag has gone on the main article page - that way it'll be a lot easier to see if someone means "this article is terrible and needs to be rewritten" rather than "the grammar in paragraph 57 of 100 needs a bit of tweaking". [[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 02:54, 1 June 2016 (PDT) | ||
| + | :::::Yeah that's good thinking; I always try to explain in my edit summary what I intended with it, namely the "will come back and work on", which just means grammar stuff. For bigger formatting/rewriting I usually put something else in the summary or <-- --> comment it in the article what needs to be addressed. I intend to go through all the {cleanup} tagged pages and proofread all of them, but that'll take a long time... | ||
| + | :::::P.S. I'm back sooner than expected :) -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 19:15, 1 June 2016 (PDT) | ||
| − | + | == Blackjack == | |
| + | Hi Bob,<br> | ||
| − | I | + | I'm doing my usual morning poke around, and I noticed your amendment to the Blackjack article base don the dev-level errata issued. When you're updating an article based on errata or ATW comments from the CGL forum, can you make sure to quote the forum text in either the notes page of the article or on the article talk page, please? The CGL forums have been wiped at least twice, so if we don't keep a copy of the text here and it happens again, no-one will be able to substantiate the amendment, and it could lead to us being accused of writing fanon again.[[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 00:24, 2 June 2016 (PDT) |
| − | + | :Oops, I was rushed last night - it's been updated. -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 09:20, 2 June 2016 (PDT) | |
| − | the | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | : | ||