Difference between revisions of "User talk:Cache"

 
(48 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
*[[User_talk:Cache/Archive_2019|2014-2019]]
 
*[[User_talk:Cache/Archive_2019|2014-2019]]
 
+
*[[User talk:Cache/Archive 2021|2020-2021]]
  
 
=Current=
 
=Current=
==Remove of missing copyright tag==
+
==Broken Link Images==
Hello Cache, can you tell me how I can remove the missing copyright information tag by pictures how had them. Or is that an job for the admin's? For example the Battle of Luthien (44).jpg. 
+
Hiya, you removed a number of broken (i.e., non-existant, redlink) image links from [[TCI Model Sets]] and [[BattleTech boxed set]], among others. Normally, I would agree with that but in these two cases the redlinks were placeholders for images that absolutely need to be found and uploaded eventually. For this reason, I'd like to revert your edits but wanted to to raise the issue with you here first. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 13:03, 6 January 2022 (EST)
With best regards
+
:Errors vs. requests. I thought about that after I'd removed them, so I put the articles in my queue to research. I may have some of those kits. I'll undo the edits myself later, if you don't beat me to it. Thanks for the note.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 16:37, 6 January 2022 (EST)
 
+
::Cheers mate! Would be great if you can fill in the blanks. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 16:49, 7 January 2022 (EST)
[[neuling]]
 
:Just fill in the information in the image summary template. Luthien(44).jpg needs a summary. But please leave the "artist" blank if you don't know their name. It helps other editors locate files that need info.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 23:52, 5 February 2020 (EST)
 
 
 
==German novel cover artists==
 
Hey Chache, you changed the artist info on german covers of [[Black Dragon (novel)]], [[Test of Vengeance]] and [[Binding Force]]. Thank you for correcting it! Could you please tell, from where these images originate? I am completing this [[List of German BattleTech novels|list on German novels]] and are desperately looking for the original source of some of the German novel covers. Thanks for your hints, best regards [[User:Phasis|Phasis]] ([[User talk:Phasis|talk]]) 05:31, 2 May 2020 (EDT)
 
:Hi Phasis. ''Black Dragon'' is a copy of [[:File:Hot_Spots_Cover.jpg]], ''Test of Vengeance'' is a flipped copy of [[:File:Warrior_-_Riposte_(anniversary).jpg]], and ''Binding Force'' is from [[:File:Heir_to_the_Dragon_(reprint).jpg]].  Also, the German cover for [[Blood of Heroes]] is from the ''Color Reference Section'' of [[The BattleTech Compendium]], and [[Star Lord (novel)]] is from the color plates of [[BattleTech Compendium: The Rules of Warfare]]. I don't know the artist for either of those at the moment.
 
:I noticed that you are adding original covers to the gallery in these articles while that cover image is already present in the infobox. Is there a reason for this duplication? It's not a violation of any policy that I am aware of, but I do feel it is unnecessary to show the same image twice. I do enjoy the work you have done so far in adding German translations to articles. Thank you. Regards,--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 10:23, 2 May 2020 (EDT)
 
::Hey Cache, thanks for your hints and your appreciation. I added all covers to the section, because it felt more complete this way. Some novels were re-issued with new cover plus the covers in other languages. So far I just have added the german covers, I know of at least some french novels. I think its nicer to have a complete gallery with all covers, instead of having to scroll up. It felt like it outweighs the redundancy. best regards [[User:Phasis|Phasis]] ([[User talk:Phasis|talk]]) 07:59, 3 May 2020 (EDT)
 
 
 
== Deleting Role Categories ==
 
Respectfully, can this be reconsidered? It seems MUL supports looking up [http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasRole=Brawler&HasBFAbility=&MinPV=&MaxPV=&Role=None+Selected&BookAuto=&FactionAuto= units by role]. For brawlers it lists:
 
* BattleMech 482
 
* Combat Vehicle 85
 
* IndustrialMech 11
 
* Protomech 18
 
* Support Vehicle 64
 
Also both RS Succession Wars and RS Clans roles are listed in the "'Mech Data" box. In fact I was planning to update it with MUL and RS material. --[[User:Mindw|Mindw]] ([[User talk:Mindw|talk]]) 06:40, 16 May 2020 (EDT)
 
:Role is a very arbitrary description, and thus iffy for wiki purposes. If you're defining it by "the MUL says so" then it boils down to copying the MUL. Sarna shouldn't try to out-MUL the MUL. My 2c on the matter. I don't feel strong about it either way. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 10:46, 16 May 2020 (EDT)
 
::This is somewhat confusing, how is that different from taking the introduction date and cost from the MUL? also, the roles are present in both Succession Wars and Clan invasion TROs? --[[User:Mindw|Mindw]] ([[User talk:Mindw|talk]]) 14:41, 16 May 2020 (EDT)
 
 
 
(Copied this discussion for consolidation to the [[Category_talk:Brawler_BattleMechs#Delete_Role_Categories|Brawler BattleMechs category talk page.]]--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 18:31, 17 May 2020 (EDT))
 
 
 
== The 3025 problem ==
 
  
Hey,
+
== RE: References ==
  
I was unhappy with the "Emblematic Mechs" sections of the state military articles because to me they instantly suffered a rather dogmatic problem that blights the BT fan base, I was actually considering removing them. Unfortunately to me your revision of the FWL just makes the issue even more pronounced by the fact that it only includes [[TRO:3025]] designs. We really need to get away from this grognard attitude in my opinion.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 17:57, 29 June 2020 (EDT)
+
Thank you! I was just about to send you a message asking where to look up how to properly format those, the way I was doing it was clogging up the references at the bottom of the page ridiculously. Appreciate your help! [[User:Mage|Mage]] ([[User talk:Mage|talk]]) 17:33, 10 January 2022 (EST)
:Re-read this and I don't want you to think it is directed at you personally, I am just frustrated with what I see as a very narrow view of this specific topic.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 19:27, 29 June 2020 (EDT)
 
::I have no problem with you removing it, I was just trying to add a fix with some sort of canon information and citation. FWL was easy, as production was spelled out. FedSuns... not so much. I gave up at that point.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 16:25, 30 June 2020 (EDT)
 
::For what it's worth, I don't think a narrow view is necessarily a bad thing, as long as it is spelled out as such and the data supplied is canon (with citations). --[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 16:29, 30 June 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== "Image" vs. "Logo" ==
+
==Marguerita Bourkova==
 +
Hey! It's hard to tell from the book, I legitimately had to research each of the artists listed and hers, out of all of them, is the style most like that of the particular portraits I've uploaded. [[User:Mage|Mage]] ([[User talk:Mage|talk]]) 17:08, 6 February 2022 (EST)
  
I've done all the changes Cache, you can review the images now and take action if you feel some should be amended.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 12:51, 10 March 2021 (EST)
+
==Direction Appreciated Award==
 +
For helping me figure out the Princess DropShip thing.  [[File:DA.jpg|Direction Appreciated Award, 1st ribbon]] [[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 20:33, 8 February 2022 (EST)
  
== New Avalon ==
+
==Images-as-references test case==
 +
Discord go boom, major outage.  When you have a chance, discussing practical concerns at [[Talk:Bull Shark]].
 +
==Images by Artists/Unknown==
 +
Okay, Cache, got the message. I'm still not used to the new template used for image references. I will be sure to leave it blank next time. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] ([[User talk:Wrangler|talk]]) 17:25, 26 March 2022 (EDT)
 +
==Filename breaking things?==
 +
[[:File:LAAF + JF 3059.png]] and [[:File:LAAF + JF 3067.png]]  Are the filenames the reason the images don't show up for me?--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 21:35, 10 April 2022 (EDT)
 +
:That appears to have been the problem. Fixed.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 00:06, 11 April 2022 (EDT)
  
You're an artist amongst mortals.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 18:26, 25 May 2021 (EDT)
+
==Citations on 'See also' sections==
 +
Just saw the Royal Divisions page today. Given that links in that section generally go to other articles and pages in the wiki, isn't requesting citations on those links a bit of overkill? (I did add citations on that note which seemed to concern you the most, since the Talon article itself is rather vague on things like the issue of Royal and Regular Army usage. I might do some work on that one tomorrow, too tired right now.) [[User:Echo Mirage|Echo Mirage]] ([[User talk:Echo Mirage|talk]]) 12:26, 21 May 2022 (EDT)
  
:Once in a while things work out as well in reality as they do in my head.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 20:07, 25 May 2021 (EDT)
+
:No, it is not overkill. For example, when I follow the link to the MAD-1R and MAD-2R, I see nothing in the ''Marauder'' article that states those variants were exclusive to the Royals. When I follow-up with the references on the ''Marauder'' article, I still see nothing that states those variants were exclusive to the Royals. I did not bother wasting my limited time tracking down the references on the others. 1) The user should not have to run down links to find references. They should be provided within the article. 2) You need to vet your information. Judging by the lack of references, you are making assumptions based on memory. That is bad for the reputation of this wiki. Put down hard facts only--WITH SPECIFIC REFERENCES. NO ASSUMPTIONS.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 17:58, 21 May 2022 (EDT)
  
== "Passion" Project ==
+
::Ahem.
  
Hey, personal question for you: what would you say ''your'' passion area is on Sarna? What do you think you prefer doing here ''the most''?--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 22:04, 25 May 2021 (EDT)
+
::''• MAD-1R The earliest version of the Marauder, used by the Royal brigades of the SLDF, the 1R utilized CASE to protect the autocannon ammunition and carried eleven tons of Ferro-Fibrous armor. It was introduced in 2612.[18] BV (2.0) = 1,420[19][20]''
:I think uploading and/or improving images in articles is number one on my list. I do enjoy a (fairly) mindless grind once in a while, hence some of my "projects" that involve minor changes over a large number of articles. Writing articles or sections thereof is dead last. --[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 17:54, 26 May 2021 (EDT)
 
  
:: I'm not surprised by your answer. I can't tell you very much ''right now'', but I've gotten permission from Nic to develop a proposal, for which I think you'd be a good candidate. Would you mind answering the following:
+
::''• MAD-2R This upgrade of the 1R eventually replaced it in 2760. The PPCs were upgraded to ER PPCs, necessitating a similar upgrade of the heat sinks to double heat sinks.[18] BV (2.0) = 1,630[21][22]'' [[Marauder#Variants|Link]]
* Would you say you know Sarna image policy and procedures well?
 
* Have you been involved in shaping (or discussing) image policy here?
 
* Have you ever defended your (or someone else's) image actions (to an admin or editor), using policy (or a modification to then-existing policy)?
 
* Who (other editor/admin) would you say is as involved (or more so) in images as yourself?
 
* Would you be comfortable being the go-to person that others directed issues to, whether for guidance, feedback, or issue resolution?
 
::I appreciate your feedback. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 18:26, 26 May 2021 (EDT)
 
  
:::Sorry for the delay.<br>1) I don't have the policy memorized by any means, but I am familiar with it.<br>2) I have [[:Policy_Talk:Images#.22edit_or_modification_to_an_image.22|discussed the image policy]] in the past and made suggestions for improvement of "image source" policy. Those two stand out at the moment.<br>3) I don't know about "defended", but I have [[User_talk:Cache/Archive_2019#Images|explained my reasoning]] a time or two.<br>4) Possibly [[:User:dmon|dmon]], [[:User:Neuling|Neuling]], [[:User:Phasis|Phasis]], and [[:User:Pserratv|Pserratv]].<br>5) I wouldn't mind. I cannot promise increased availability, but I'm on/learning discord now.<br>--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 16:36, 28 May 2021 (EDT)
+
::You were saying? [[User:Echo Mirage|Echo Mirage]] ([[User talk:Echo Mirage|talk]]) 14:42, 23 May 2022 (EDT)
 +
:::I was saying you are making assumptions. Drawing connections where none are referenced. How does "used by" equate to "exclusive to"? You are also ignoring my statement that users should not have to chase references across multiple articles. They should be provided in the first article.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 17:40, 23 May 2022 (EDT)
  
::::I'm looking into #4, but thank you. This helps. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 21:00, 28 May 2021 (EDT)
+
== Image Categories (Foreign Language) ==
  
== Miniatures note ==
+
Hello Cache.  As some context, I have been working on foreign editions/products recently and have encountered several novel cover images and product images in these other languages.  Some of the approaches to image management differ between the languages.  For instance, the German product images are often tagged with the product image subcategory based on product type (like [[:Category: Novel Cover Images]]) and one of the German product categories ([[:Category: German Editions]] or [[:Category: German Language Products]]), while product images for other languages were simply tagged with the product image subcategory.  So I am working to uniformize the approach across the different languages. 
  
I think what you just stated in the summary field should be included in a cite (for that article passage). A note like that{{m}}from a primary source{{m}}would be a nearly-unassailable fact.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 11:10, 31 May 2021 (EDT)
+
The approach that seems apt (at least to me) is tagging a foreign product image with an product image subcategory (in addition to and independent of what image categories it posesses).  See [[:Category:Spanish Product Images]] and [[:Category:Hungarian Product Images]] for examples of this model. I plan to extend this in parallel to [[German Product Images]] and [[French Product Images]]. Given your work with images and knowledge of the image categories, do you see any obvious problems with this approach?  --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 22:46, 30 May 2022 (EDT)
  
:When I get a chance, I will write an essay on that topic, and my other project with IWM around the same time. They'll be easier to reference that way.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 14:12, 31 May 2021 (EDT)
+
:Just a quick note to let you know that I'm not ignoring your question. I hope to be able to sit down and answer you some time this weekend. --[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 14:25, 2 June 2022 (EDT)
  
:: Sounds good. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 22:49, 31 May 2021 (EDT)
+
::Thanks for the note. No worries.  I understand that things are busy.  I got a helpful second opinion from [[User:Frabby]] in [[Category talk:German Editions]].  So I have begun the transition.  If there is anything that 'breaks' the structure of product image categories/subcategories, please feel free to give a holler.  --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 20:03, 2 June 2022 (EDT)
  
== BattleTech Style Guide ==
+
== Broken image links ==
  
I've been (recently) meaning to develop a policy for how words and names are handled in-universe. so that we editors can point to it to help other editors develop internally-consistent articles. I just stumbled across [[User:Mbear|Mbear]]'s own such project, stalled since 2014. Instead of re-inventing the wheel...The incomplete policy is [[Policy:BattleTech Style Guide|here]], if you'd like to jump in and take part in its development.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 08:27, 3 June 2021 (EDT)
+
Oops. Thanks for catching those. [[User:Madness Divine|Madness Divine]] ([[User talk:Madness Divine|talk]]) 11:25, 19 August 2022 (EDT)
 +
:You're welcome.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 17:16, 19 August 2022 (EDT)
  
:I will chip in where I can.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 09:31, 3 June 2021 (EDT)
+
== Ashley Pollard Portrait ==
  
:: Not a problem. There's no rush. When I finish it, I'll formally open it to discussion.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 10:45, 3 June 2021 (EDT)
+
Thank you for finding that updated portrait of [[Ashley Watkins]]/Pollard.  The image quality makes her page look much nicer than the one I pulled from her blog!--[[User:Beemer|Beemer]] ([[User talk:Beemer|talk]]) 21:35, 17 September 2022 (EDT)
 +
:No problem. I think the higher quality image is a decade old but it'll do.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 23:49, 17 September 2022 (EDT)
  
== Addition of Brunel Dump Truck (LMR) image ==
+
== Hadur LRM variant ==
  
Hi Cache. The image was a gift from Sippy the Mead Monk of the Black Pants Legion. We both agreed that the Brunel LRM needed some love and so this artwork was born. --[[User:foxy-of-many-lives|foxy-of-many-lives]] ([[User talk:foxy-of-many-lives|talk]]) 08:45, 14 June 2021 (GMT)
+
Thanks for the update, I presently don't have the 'Technical Readout: 3150' book. [[User:Echo Mirage|Echo Mirage]] ([[User talk:Echo Mirage|talk]]) 14:57, 14 January 2023 (EST)
  
== Images as Sources ==
+
:I'm curious now... where did you get the info that you wrote into the article?--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 18:10, 14 January 2023 (EST)
 +
::Got the info on the LRM variant's introduction and initial employment during the Battle of New Oslo from the Operation NOYAN article. The description of the LRM variant in action indicated that the LRM was equipped with a full scale TAG system as well as a LRM launcher. Based on that as well as the space and tonnage available to the baseline ''Hadur'', I assumed that the new variant was a minimum change design that in line with general Clan doctrine (and associated game designer tendencies!) maintained as much ranged firepower as possible while preserving or improving the tonnage available for the primary ammo, in this case the LRM missiles. (To make the most of the available primary ammo capacity I also believed that it was likely that it would have a LRM-5 or possibly LRM-6 launcher.) I was therefore quite surprised when you dug up the detailed specs on the new variant showing that, contrary to the information on its deployment in the field, it is actually equipped with a Light TAG system (the choice of a double LRM-15 system was another surprise, especially given the current Battletech construction rules). As it currently stands, the LRM variant is wildly at variance with the lore; it literally can't carry out the role and tactics that have been described for it. For one thing it would not be able to stick with its standard Hadur partner, but would have to move well ahead to have any hope of spotting targets at the best range of the Arrow IV equipped Hadur, while still being unable to use its own LRMs to anything like full advantage, targeting computer notwithstanding (not to mention that it will probably run out of ammo far more quickly that its partner [only a couple of reloads, if I haven't totally fouled up my tonnage calculations gamewise]). The reactive armor is yet another strange design choice. I'm beginning to wonder if there hasn't been some seriously crossed wires at Catalyst Game Labs here.
  
Cache, pre-SE employment request for you here. In the last few days, we've experienced the opportunity to identify information as canon based upon that proclamation (in this case, [[Ray Arrastia]]). I wanted to capture the "proof" in a more permanent fashion, so grabbed and uploaded 2 screencaps:
+
::I could be wrong, but isn't this new variant unique in putting a Light TAG system on a LRM platform? While light TAG systems aren't entirely unheard of on Clan OmniVehicles and combat vehicles (and the occasional OmniMech or BattleMech), they are usually associated with alternate configurations intended for elemental support or forward artillery spotting, or vehicles specialised for same (including some ProtoMechs lest I forget). And the missile systems where equipped are almost invariably Streak SRMs. Otherwise Clan vehicles equipped with Light TAGs are generally designed for second line units (such as Clan Watch [MP] and ''Solahma'' formations) intended for infantry support or hunting down enemy infantry in rear areas. [[User:Echo Mirage|Echo Mirage]] ([[User talk:Echo Mirage|talk]]) 18:03, 18 January 2023 (EST)
* [[:File:Unreleased coordinates 2021-06-21 (CGL permission).png]]
 
* [[:File:Tamar Rising coordinates 2021-06-16 (CGL).png]]
 
Would you please generate up a properly-filled out Image tag for these two, to serve as Policy-level examples for future such images serving as citable sources? If you need details, please see [[BattleTechWiki_talk:Project_Planets#Permission_to_use_unreleased_coordinates_.26_new_names|this discussion post]] (or ask me). Thank you.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 22:12, 20 June 2021 (EDT)
 
  
== Thank you ==
+
:::One problem with writing wiki articles based solely on information in other wiki articles is that you have no way of verifying the information. That is a very important step. Without verification we get speculation or outright incorrect information, which is a bad thing. Speculation is to be avoided.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 20:59, 18 January 2023 (EST)
  
Thank you for that little reference that Mark was David McKinnons father, I had missed that, and you allowed me to plug a hole in the [[House McKinnon]] family tree.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 11:50, 29 June 2021 (EDT)
+
== Handling Component Images used in Image Composites ==
:No problem. There was only a one-sentence mention of him in the book, so it made for an easy update. --[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 12:13, 29 June 2021 (EDT)
 
  
== Iron Wind Metals and Ral Partha Europe ==
+
Cache, I have the following question.  When creating combinations of images that then will replace the original component images within articles, I presume that we would wish to keep the original component images around even though the latter are not directly used in an article (for the purposes of preserving source info and history).  Is there a recommended way to handle such?  See [[:File:Catapult Token.jpg]] for an example.  --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 23:06, 31 January 2023 (EST)
  
Hello Cache,  I have an interesting question for you.  As some context, I have been compiling a list of Iron Wind Metals Miniatures (currently focused on the 2003-2007 period). There are gaps in what the Web Archive record of Iron Wind Metals own web site/store, but I have found that Ral Partha Europe's websites were much better preserved in that time period. As I mesh the two sets of data, the following question has come up.  I am curious if you have any helpful light to shed on this.  
+
:My first thought is to upload the composite image as a replacement for one of the original images. (The "front" image in the case of the ''Catapult''.) Then rename the file, mark the unused ("rear") image for deletion, and replace the individual images with the composite in all affected articles. This preserves the history of at least one image without leaving orphans lying around. Odds are both images were uploaded by the same user so there isn't much of anything lost. --[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 20:52, 1 February 2023 (EST)
  
1) Ral Partha Europe's website indicates that they manufacture and distribute Ral Partha lines of miniatures (including BattleTech) for EuropeThis started before FASA ceased and continued after Iron Wind Metals was spun offThe lines appear coordinated both in terms of catalog codes and release times.  (Ral Partha Europe releases occurred typically a few months after the corresponding release for Iron Wind Metals, at least for the cases that I have data on both.)  Given that they were a manufacturer and not simply a distributor or retailer, it would seem that there may a few different ways that the BattleTech lines could shared.  (i) Molds were made at IWM and sent to RPE for their use, (ii) Masters were lent to RPE for the creation of their own molds, (iii) Actual product was sent from IWM to RPE, (iv) some combination of the prior, or (v) something entirely different.  Do you have any background on how miniatures were shared/coordinated between the two?
+
::Thanks for the noteI think I will do this with one slight modificationI will upload the rear image into the front image first and then upload the composite image into the front image (then rename and relink).  Then the original rear image will also be archived within the history of the final image.  --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 19:26, 2 February 2023 (EST)
  
Regardless of the nature of the linkage, my current operating assumption is that anything released by Ral Partha Europe had been released by IWM (or Ral Partha) in North America sometime earlier.
+
==Thanks==
  
--[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 23:11, 7 July 2021 (EDT)
+
Just wanted to express appreciation for our collaboration and your timely assistance with a number of edits. [[File:AA 1bol.jpg|Assistance Appreciated Award, 2nd ribbon]] --[[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 20:26, 15 October 2023 (EDT)
 
 
:Sorry for the delay. I don't have any concrete information on how RP or IWM shared sculpts with RPE. I have only heard that RP/IWM sent them masters. Whether this was a master sculpt, casting, or mold I do not know. I don't know why the deal stopped some years ago either, but that's why RPE hasn't had anything resembling a recent sculpt on sale for well over a decade. Also, during the Ral Partha days, RPE produced two modified sculpts that were not available from RP in the US: They sold a ''BattleMaster'' and ''Phoenix Hawk'' (both Unseen) that had separate arms. The ''Phoenix Hawk'' used the arms from the Crescent Hawk PXH LAM and the ''BattleMaster's'' arms were just modified to have ball-and-socket shoulder joints. I have no idea how that deal worked either.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 22:33, 11 July 2021 (EDT)
 
 
 
::Thanks for the response and the bit of info.  This particular point sounds like an unsolved mystery at present.  --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 22:25, 13 July 2021 (EDT)
 
  
 
== Award ==
 
== Award ==
  
Not quite vandalism, but I wanted to let you know I appreciate how quickly you intercepted that fanon. [[File:VC 1bol.jpg|Vandal Cop Award, 2nd ribbon]]--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 23:14, 29 July 2021 (EDT)
+
Hey Cache,
 
 
== Archer info? ==
 
 
 
Cache, I've searched for "Archer" and "Rubinsky" in Field Manual: Mercenaries and the Mercenary Supplementals, but I can't find any info about the ARC-2R (Rubinsky). Do you have any info for it? Is it Field Manual Mercs Revised? Thanks!--[[User:Mbear|Mbear]]<sup>([[User_talk:Mbear|talk]])</sup> 12:38, 17 August 2021 (EDT)
 
:''[[Field Manual: Mercenaries]]'', p. 81, second column at the bottom. There's a handful of 'Mech descriptions--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 12:49, 17 August 2021 (EDT).
 
::This is what you're looking for, right? "...including the substitution of SRM packs and a hatchet for an ''Archer's'' LRM launchers..."--[[User:Mbear|Mbear]]<sup>([[User_talk:Mbear|talk]])</sup> 13:47, 17 August 2021 (EDT)
 
::(Strange, but my PDF doesn't have that. I had to get the actual paper book. Oh well.)--[[User:Mbear|Mbear]]<sup>([[User_talk:Mbear|talk]])</sup> 13:49, 17 August 2021 (EDT)
 
:::That's it. Haven't looked to see if the others customs have been added. Odd that it's missing from the PDF.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 14:51, 17 August 2021 (EDT)
 
  
== MapPack Cover Image Matters ==
+
I just wanted to express my appreciation for your recent efforts helping out around the wiki in some of the problem areas.
 +
[[File:SubAdd.jpg|Substantial Addition Award, 1st ribbon]], I have placed your first Substantial addition award on your board.
  
Cache, in the process of doing moves and link updates, I discovered an issue with the 2013 MapPack cover images. It appears that for 8 of the 13, that there are two images uploaded for each.  The more recently uploaded ones are significantly higher resolution, but there is information posted in the earlier upload regarding artist.  Also the earlier uploads cover all 13, but the higher res ones cover only 8 of them.  [Specifically, the following five do not have higher res versions: MapPack BattleForce.jpg, MapPack Box Canyon.jpg, File:MapPack Rolling Hills 1.jpg, File:MapPack Rolling Hills 2.jpg, and File:MapPack Woodland.jpg.]  So it appears that some form of unification is in order.  I am unaware of the protocol for unifying duplicate image pages, but I thought such would be in your wheelhouse. --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 19:43, 23 September 2021 (EDT)
+
Thank you.
 +
--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 08:16, 29 December 2023 (EST)
  
:I am running into the same issue pretty often with unit insignias. The best way I know to address the issue is: 1) Choose the superior image. 2) Copy any image summary data to the superior image that is not already there. 3) Change all links from the inferior image to point to the superior image. 4) Request deletion of the inferior image. [[:Template:Deletion|Request for deletion templates are here.]] (Template can go on the bottom of the page.) I suggest "speedy deletion" for duplicate images. In the "reason" section, include a link to the superior image, like this{{m}}<nowiki>{{delete|Duplicate of [[:File:use-a-colon-before-file-for-text-link-only.gif]]|speedy}}</nowiki>
+
==Viper Origin Note==
:This will put the inferior image into a category where Admins and Senior Editors can review the image and delete if appropriate. Here is an example of an image awaiting review: [[:File:Jfmu.png]]  --[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 17:03, 24 September 2021 (EST)
+
Thank you. The criticism was very productive. [[User:HussarZwei|HussarZwei]] ([[User talk:HussarZwei|talk]]) 01:08, 8 January 2024 (EST)

Latest revision as of 02:08, 8 January 2024

Archive[edit]

Current[edit]

Broken Link Images[edit]

Hiya, you removed a number of broken (i.e., non-existant, redlink) image links from TCI Model Sets and BattleTech boxed set, among others. Normally, I would agree with that but in these two cases the redlinks were placeholders for images that absolutely need to be found and uploaded eventually. For this reason, I'd like to revert your edits but wanted to to raise the issue with you here first. Frabby (talk) 13:03, 6 January 2022 (EST)

Errors vs. requests. I thought about that after I'd removed them, so I put the articles in my queue to research. I may have some of those kits. I'll undo the edits myself later, if you don't beat me to it. Thanks for the note.--Cache (talk) 16:37, 6 January 2022 (EST)
Cheers mate! Would be great if you can fill in the blanks. Frabby (talk) 16:49, 7 January 2022 (EST)

RE: References[edit]

Thank you! I was just about to send you a message asking where to look up how to properly format those, the way I was doing it was clogging up the references at the bottom of the page ridiculously. Appreciate your help! Mage (talk) 17:33, 10 January 2022 (EST)

Marguerita Bourkova[edit]

Hey! It's hard to tell from the book, I legitimately had to research each of the artists listed and hers, out of all of them, is the style most like that of the particular portraits I've uploaded. Mage (talk) 17:08, 6 February 2022 (EST)

Direction Appreciated Award[edit]

For helping me figure out the Princess DropShip thing. Direction Appreciated Award, 1st ribbon Talvin (talk) 20:33, 8 February 2022 (EST)

Images-as-references test case[edit]

Discord go boom, major outage. When you have a chance, discussing practical concerns at Talk:Bull Shark.

Images by Artists/Unknown[edit]

Okay, Cache, got the message. I'm still not used to the new template used for image references. I will be sure to leave it blank next time. -- Wrangler (talk) 17:25, 26 March 2022 (EDT)

Filename breaking things?[edit]

File:LAAF + JF 3059.png and File:LAAF + JF 3067.png Are the filenames the reason the images don't show up for me?--Talvin (talk) 21:35, 10 April 2022 (EDT)

That appears to have been the problem. Fixed.--Cache (talk) 00:06, 11 April 2022 (EDT)

Citations on 'See also' sections[edit]

Just saw the Royal Divisions page today. Given that links in that section generally go to other articles and pages in the wiki, isn't requesting citations on those links a bit of overkill? (I did add citations on that note which seemed to concern you the most, since the Talon article itself is rather vague on things like the issue of Royal and Regular Army usage. I might do some work on that one tomorrow, too tired right now.) Echo Mirage (talk) 12:26, 21 May 2022 (EDT)

No, it is not overkill. For example, when I follow the link to the MAD-1R and MAD-2R, I see nothing in the Marauder article that states those variants were exclusive to the Royals. When I follow-up with the references on the Marauder article, I still see nothing that states those variants were exclusive to the Royals. I did not bother wasting my limited time tracking down the references on the others. 1) The user should not have to run down links to find references. They should be provided within the article. 2) You need to vet your information. Judging by the lack of references, you are making assumptions based on memory. That is bad for the reputation of this wiki. Put down hard facts only--WITH SPECIFIC REFERENCES. NO ASSUMPTIONS.--Cache (talk) 17:58, 21 May 2022 (EDT)
Ahem.
• MAD-1R The earliest version of the Marauder, used by the Royal brigades of the SLDF, the 1R utilized CASE to protect the autocannon ammunition and carried eleven tons of Ferro-Fibrous armor. It was introduced in 2612.[18] BV (2.0) = 1,420[19][20]
• MAD-2R This upgrade of the 1R eventually replaced it in 2760. The PPCs were upgraded to ER PPCs, necessitating a similar upgrade of the heat sinks to double heat sinks.[18] BV (2.0) = 1,630[21][22] Link
You were saying? Echo Mirage (talk) 14:42, 23 May 2022 (EDT)
I was saying you are making assumptions. Drawing connections where none are referenced. How does "used by" equate to "exclusive to"? You are also ignoring my statement that users should not have to chase references across multiple articles. They should be provided in the first article.--Cache (talk) 17:40, 23 May 2022 (EDT)

Image Categories (Foreign Language)[edit]

Hello Cache. As some context, I have been working on foreign editions/products recently and have encountered several novel cover images and product images in these other languages. Some of the approaches to image management differ between the languages. For instance, the German product images are often tagged with the product image subcategory based on product type (like Category: Novel Cover Images) and one of the German product categories (Category: German Editions or Category: German Language Products), while product images for other languages were simply tagged with the product image subcategory. So I am working to uniformize the approach across the different languages.

The approach that seems apt (at least to me) is tagging a foreign product image with an product image subcategory (in addition to and independent of what image categories it posesses). See Category:Spanish Product Images and Category:Hungarian Product Images for examples of this model. I plan to extend this in parallel to German Product Images and French Product Images. Given your work with images and knowledge of the image categories, do you see any obvious problems with this approach? --Dude RB (talk) 22:46, 30 May 2022 (EDT)

Just a quick note to let you know that I'm not ignoring your question. I hope to be able to sit down and answer you some time this weekend. --Cache (talk) 14:25, 2 June 2022 (EDT)
Thanks for the note. No worries. I understand that things are busy. I got a helpful second opinion from User:Frabby in Category talk:German Editions. So I have begun the transition. If there is anything that 'breaks' the structure of product image categories/subcategories, please feel free to give a holler. --Dude RB (talk) 20:03, 2 June 2022 (EDT)

Broken image links[edit]

Oops. Thanks for catching those. Madness Divine (talk) 11:25, 19 August 2022 (EDT)

You're welcome.--Cache (talk) 17:16, 19 August 2022 (EDT)

Ashley Pollard Portrait[edit]

Thank you for finding that updated portrait of Ashley Watkins/Pollard. The image quality makes her page look much nicer than the one I pulled from her blog!--Beemer (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2022 (EDT)

No problem. I think the higher quality image is a decade old but it'll do.--Cache (talk) 23:49, 17 September 2022 (EDT)

Hadur LRM variant[edit]

Thanks for the update, I presently don't have the 'Technical Readout: 3150' book. Echo Mirage (talk) 14:57, 14 January 2023 (EST)

I'm curious now... where did you get the info that you wrote into the article?--Cache (talk) 18:10, 14 January 2023 (EST)
Got the info on the LRM variant's introduction and initial employment during the Battle of New Oslo from the Operation NOYAN article. The description of the LRM variant in action indicated that the LRM was equipped with a full scale TAG system as well as a LRM launcher. Based on that as well as the space and tonnage available to the baseline Hadur, I assumed that the new variant was a minimum change design that in line with general Clan doctrine (and associated game designer tendencies!) maintained as much ranged firepower as possible while preserving or improving the tonnage available for the primary ammo, in this case the LRM missiles. (To make the most of the available primary ammo capacity I also believed that it was likely that it would have a LRM-5 or possibly LRM-6 launcher.) I was therefore quite surprised when you dug up the detailed specs on the new variant showing that, contrary to the information on its deployment in the field, it is actually equipped with a Light TAG system (the choice of a double LRM-15 system was another surprise, especially given the current Battletech construction rules). As it currently stands, the LRM variant is wildly at variance with the lore; it literally can't carry out the role and tactics that have been described for it. For one thing it would not be able to stick with its standard Hadur partner, but would have to move well ahead to have any hope of spotting targets at the best range of the Arrow IV equipped Hadur, while still being unable to use its own LRMs to anything like full advantage, targeting computer notwithstanding (not to mention that it will probably run out of ammo far more quickly that its partner [only a couple of reloads, if I haven't totally fouled up my tonnage calculations gamewise]). The reactive armor is yet another strange design choice. I'm beginning to wonder if there hasn't been some seriously crossed wires at Catalyst Game Labs here.
I could be wrong, but isn't this new variant unique in putting a Light TAG system on a LRM platform? While light TAG systems aren't entirely unheard of on Clan OmniVehicles and combat vehicles (and the occasional OmniMech or BattleMech), they are usually associated with alternate configurations intended for elemental support or forward artillery spotting, or vehicles specialised for same (including some ProtoMechs lest I forget). And the missile systems where equipped are almost invariably Streak SRMs. Otherwise Clan vehicles equipped with Light TAGs are generally designed for second line units (such as Clan Watch [MP] and Solahma formations) intended for infantry support or hunting down enemy infantry in rear areas. Echo Mirage (talk) 18:03, 18 January 2023 (EST)
One problem with writing wiki articles based solely on information in other wiki articles is that you have no way of verifying the information. That is a very important step. Without verification we get speculation or outright incorrect information, which is a bad thing. Speculation is to be avoided.--Cache (talk) 20:59, 18 January 2023 (EST)

Handling Component Images used in Image Composites[edit]

Cache, I have the following question. When creating combinations of images that then will replace the original component images within articles, I presume that we would wish to keep the original component images around even though the latter are not directly used in an article (for the purposes of preserving source info and history). Is there a recommended way to handle such? See File:Catapult Token.jpg for an example. --Dude RB (talk) 23:06, 31 January 2023 (EST)

My first thought is to upload the composite image as a replacement for one of the original images. (The "front" image in the case of the Catapult.) Then rename the file, mark the unused ("rear") image for deletion, and replace the individual images with the composite in all affected articles. This preserves the history of at least one image without leaving orphans lying around. Odds are both images were uploaded by the same user so there isn't much of anything lost. --Cache (talk) 20:52, 1 February 2023 (EST)
Thanks for the note. I think I will do this with one slight modification. I will upload the rear image into the front image first and then upload the composite image into the front image (then rename and relink). Then the original rear image will also be archived within the history of the final image. --Dude RB (talk) 19:26, 2 February 2023 (EST)

Thanks[edit]

Just wanted to express appreciation for our collaboration and your timely assistance with a number of edits. Assistance Appreciated Award, 2nd ribbon --Csdavis715 (talk) 20:26, 15 October 2023 (EDT)

Award[edit]

Hey Cache,

I just wanted to express my appreciation for your recent efforts helping out around the wiki in some of the problem areas. Substantial Addition Award, 1st ribbon, I have placed your first Substantial addition award on your board.

Thank you. --Dmon (talk) 08:16, 29 December 2023 (EST)

Viper Origin Note[edit]

Thank you. The criticism was very productive. HussarZwei (talk) 01:08, 8 January 2024 (EST)