User talk:Echo Mirage

Welcome

Welcome, Echo Mirage, to BattleTechWiki!

We look forward to your contributions and want to help you get off to a good strong start. Hopefully you will soon join the army of BattleTech Editors! If you need help formatting the pages, visit the manual of style. For general questions go to the Help section or the FAQ. If you can't find your answer there, please ask an Admin.


Additional tips
Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the wiki:

  • For policies and guidelines, see The Five Core Policies of BattleTechWiki and the BTW Policies. Another good place to check out is our market of Projects, to see how the smaller communities within BTW do things in their particular niche areas.
  • Each and every page (articles, policies, projects, images, etc.) has its very own discussion/talk page, found on the tab line at the top of the page. This is a great place to find out what the community is discussing along that subject and what previous issues have already been solved.
  • If you want to play around with your new wiki skills, the Sandbox is for you. Don't worry: you won't break anything. A great resource for printing out is the Wiki Cheat Sheet.
  • If you're not registered, then please consider doing so. At the very least, you'll have a UserPage that you own, rather than sharing one with the community.
  • Also consider writing something about yourself on your UserPage (marked as "Echo Mirage" at the top of the page, though only do this if you're registered). You'll go from being a 'redshirt' to a 'blueshirt,' with the respect of a more permanent member.
    • This is really helpful for the admins, as it gives your account that touch of "humanity" that assists us in our never-ending battle with spambots.
  • For your first few edits on the wiki, please do not add any URLs (which can be an indicator of SPAM).
  • Consider introducing yourself on our Discord server.
  • In your Preferences, under the edit tab, consider checking Add pages I create to my watchlist and Add pages I edit to my watchlist, so that you can see how your efforts have affected the community. Check back on following visits by clicking on watchlist.
  • If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random button in the sidebar, or check out the List of Wanted Pages. Or even go to Special Pages to see what weird stuff is actually tracked by this wiki.
  • Please sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the circled button in this image; this will automatically produce your name (or IP address, if you are editing anonymously) and the date.


Again, welcome to Sarna's BattleTechWiki!

*******Be Bold*******

-- New user message (talk) 06:56, 3 May 2022 (EDT)

Citations

Hey Echo Mirage,

Welcome to Sarna! Nice start on the Space Marine article, you do need to add some citations to back up the info though! Resource if you need it Help:References.--Dmon (talk) 09:35, 3 May 2022 (EDT)

Thanks! I will probably need to make it a bit neater as well at the rate things are going. I'm also planning to add in a new section listing some more of the other 'black water' marine elements. Echo Mirage (talk) 09:49, 3 May 2022 (EDT)
Hi EM, Since Dmon already brought up citations in the Space Marine article, I wanted to drop a different suggestion. The "See Also" sections you added are very non-specific. Meaning, you have links to entire articles where only a portion of that article is relevant. Perhaps further breaking it down into sections would help. For example: "Transports", "Actions Involving Space Marines", and "Sources Containing Rules for Space Marines" would divide it up. Then link to the most specific section possible in the article, where available.--Cache (talk) 16:26, 3 May 2022 (EDT)
Ok, I'll see if I can refine the links in that section a bit more tomorrow. Thanks for the suggestion! Echo Mirage (talk) 16:36, 3 May 2022 (EDT)
Echo Mirage,
I noticed you have been adding information to articles again without providing specific references. The reputation of this wiki is built on references. Please look through your edits and add them.--Cache (talk) 11:32, 19 May 2022 (EDT)
Sorry, didn't think I needed to put in a reference for the Blackhearts there since they were the only ones known to use the original Nighthawk Mk. XXI armour (though I did notice while double checking, that the MUL compilers had gotten a bit lazy or pressed for time and had reused that artwork a fair bit, including for the Bounty Hunter's XXX armors!). I put in the other citations/clarifications you requested as well. Echo Mirage (talk) 13:28, 20 May 2022 (EDT)
The best rule to follow for Sarna, or indeed any Wiki, is "Do not Write it unless you Cite it." I am one of the people who has been trying to clean up the backlog of works lacking sources, and it is often just easier to remove what is not sourced than it is to try to read the mind of someone who may have written this 11 years ago from a book that isn't even available to purchase anymore. If you add something to an article, it should have a clear reference at the end with the source and the page (or for fiction ebooks, at least chapter) number at the least.--Talvin (talk) 13:34, 20 May 2022 (EDT)
That approach would seem to have the risk of throwing out the Baby with the bathwater, though. Echo Mirage (talk) 12:12, 21 May 2022 (EDT)
Yes, sometimes we have to sacrifice things for the good of the Wiki. Sometimes people come in and post stuff that is fanon, or an interpretation of a source that doesn't match up with a consensus about what it means, or that does not match up with what the developers said about it. Sarna has a clear policy on this, and it is linked from every "refimprove" banner. Anything that is not properly cited may simply be removed. The burden is not on everyone else to take money out of the grocery budget and buy every single sourcebook to figure out where someone found that bit that the original editor may have made up in their own heads. When I add something to the Wiki, I add citations so that others can verify what I wrote against the original text--that's not only the essence of what this is all about, it is basic courtesy.
Sir, Ma'am, or Gentle, I am going to ask that you take a little time to consider Special:ActiveUsers. Click the '100' there and you will see everyone who has been active on this wiki in the last thirty days. That's it. That's the team we have right now. 13,503 edits in the last month. Of those, a third have been made by the people who have been coming here to this page to discuss your edits. We are among the busiest people here, and we don't get paid a cent for it. We are trying to help you improve and to fit into the rules and expectations of this Wiki. I am asking you to step back and consider how to work with us, not against us, to help us and not to make us take time away from adding new content and fixing stuff from long ago. Thank you.--Talvin (talk) 12:42, 21 May 2022 (EDT)
EM,
1) I ask that you not make disparaging remarks about others (the MUL team in this case) while on this site. See Policy:No personal attacks.
2) Unless that particular image of the Nighthawk Mk. XXI is specifically remarked to be a member of the Blackhearts, or is wearing an insignia indication so, it should not be labeled as such. That type of assumption is non-canon and can be considered fan-fiction. Both of which are prohibited here.--Cache (talk) 17:50, 21 May 2022 (EDT)

Evening folks, This has not boiled over to the point that I feel I need to action as an Admin just yet but I would like people to take a deep breath and think about puppies and kittens for a second.

Echo Mirage, I very much get the impression that your heart is in the right place but some of your work is either not meeting our established standards or methodology. As a fairly new member of our community that is not entierly unexpected or uncommon. The Sarna is pretty damn big compared to most wikis and we likely have as many "unwritten guidelines" as we have official policies. Consider introducing yourself on our Discord server, ask some questions and just generally get a feel for how the community works. I would like to think that once we hammer out some kinks you will find that as a community we all want the same thing. The wiki to be as good as it can be.--Dmon (talk) 18:53, 21 May 2022 (EDT)

I do not believe I ever disparaged the MUL team, and my apologises if I said something that was misinterpreted as such. I believe what I said about the MUL elsewhere can be summed up in that it is a good and handy quick reference but currently not quite as as reliable as an in-depth resource due to ongoing issues. I do have to ask though, exactly what new canon source states that, for a couple of examples, that there were no Royal variants of the Marauder BattleMech, and that the Blackhearts were not the sole users of the original Mk. XXI Nighthawk suits? I'll consider joining the discord. Echo Mirage (talk) 15:03, 23 May 2022 (EDT)
Nobody in this discussion stated that there are no Royal variants of the Marauder BattleMech. Regarding the Nighthawk Mk. XXI, the MUL has it available to factions other than the original Star League, starting from the Civil War era onward. In addition to those factions, Tactics of Duty states that the Gray Death Legion found a number of the suits on Karbala. The whole point of this whole discussion asking you to provide references is that you, as the editor, need to show proof that what you are adding is fact, not for others to prove you wrong.--Cache (talk) 18:04, 23 May 2022 (EDT)

Infantry weapons

Hey Echo Mirage, I reverted your edits on the PM231 article as there is an active effort to rebuild the Infantry Weapons section away from the 73,000 sub categories we currently have, the plan is to strip it right back and basically start again.--Dmon (talk) 21:52, 10 May 2022 (EDT)

Same on the Terran Arms XM30 Carbine.--Dmon (talk) 21:54, 10 May 2022 (EDT)
Ok, but do you mind if I add back the 'Terran Alliance' category to the two articles then? I'll ask you later which other ones it would be safe to add back while the rework is ongoing. Echo Mirage (talk) 21:59, 10 May 2022 (EDT)
I guess you could add Terran Alliance back in, I have not decided what the new category structure is going to be yet, I do not think we have enough info to build a nation based category tree though.--Dmon (talk) 22:10, 10 May 2022 (EDT)
Thanks! Echo Mirage (talk) 22:13, 10 May 2022 (EDT)

Good Morning! Would there be any problem with me adding the 'Technology' category to the above two articles? Echo Mirage (talk) 06:50, 11 May 2022 (EDT)

Good Morning! There is not really reason for the technology category to be in an individual weapon article, it is a "meta" category. Category:Infantry Weapons could be in technology, or maybe a step further and separate things like rifles, pistols etc but a PM231 is not a technology in of itself. Similar issue with the JumpShips you are adding the Terran Alliance category too, do individual jumpships belong in a top level category about an entire nation?
The wiki format lends itself to the creation of "category soup" where everything is thrown in, but what we really need is "category trees".--Dmon (talk) 07:11, 11 May 2022 (EDT)
I see what you mean. With regards as to the individual TSN jumpships, I was trying to gather them together in one place, pending some category refinement later. I'll try a bit of that now. Echo Mirage (talk) 07:20, 11 May 2022 (EDT)
Go for it! you are working in some of the rougher parts of the wiki so there is a lot of space for refinement of ideas.--Dmon (talk) 07:31, 11 May 2022 (EDT)
I think you kinda need to take some time to layout what you are planning Echo. (Your user page is a good place to do this), refinement is good but stuff like the history category.. If you look at what is in there already it is full of articles called History of xxxxx, so that gives you an indication of the current direction. The fact that History of the Terran Alliance does not exist is not a reason to turn the history category into a "soup" of anything related to the history of--Dmon (talk) 09:29, 11 May 2022 (EDT)
Yes, my category bonsai may need some more work! Think I will come back to that another day, and just work on some more articles for now! Echo Mirage (talk) 09:34, 11 May 2022 (EDT)

"In the Navy"

When working with Spacecraft, a good person to talk to is User:BrokenMnemonic. He did a lot of the work on the spacecraft on here. If you start getting into Word of Blake Naval Assets, let me know: I am slowly but surely working on that. I don't know of anyone else who is focusing on the Terran Alliance stuff, so congrats, you found yourself a niche. :) --Talvin (talk) 08:28, 11 May 2022 (EDT)

Thanks lads! Echo Mirage (talk) 08:31, 11 May 2022 (EDT)

Faction Equipment

KungsArmé#Equipment. We find it best to not try to out-MUL the MUL. Faction lists of equipment were removed from the wiki because they are impossible to properly maintain and the MUL is a free (official) resource. The categories that remain cover only equipment manufactured by factions. --Cache (talk) 11:33, 12 May 2022 (EDT)

Hi. I wasn't trying to make a comprehensive list, just a sampling of the units used, and concentrating where possible on equipment made domestically. Echo Mirage (talk) 11:39, 12 May 2022 (EDT)
I see somebody else has already raised it, I was just looking at the Rotunda article and was going to ask about the support for it being produced for ComStar given that the article says "The design became extinct outside of the stockpiled examples in the military forces of ComStar and the Word of Blake.". That is something very different.--Dmon (talk) 19:04, 13 May 2022 (EDT)
I thought the category was for equipment that was produced and/or used by Comstar? Echo Mirage (talk) 19:09, 13 May 2022 (EDT)
The text did say that but it should not of, As Cache has already said, the MUL is built specifically for the purpose of charting who uses what. The wiki is more interested in who builds things, especially since third succession war scavenger culture means that literally every faction has had every unit at some point. For a real world example of our thinking, the M1 Abrams. It is an American Tank, and you would be hard pressed to find anybody who says different despite the fact that half a dozen diffent countries use them.--Dmon (talk) 19:21, 13 May 2022 (EDT)
The Abrams may not be the best example to use there, despite it eventually becoming one of the best tanks in history, due to its rather tangled history, procurement and otherwise. ;) As to the MUL, it is a handy quick reference for some things, but for things like in-depth coverage it does have a fair number of shortcomings not least of which is that more than a few canon units still don't have entries, or complete ones at least. With regards as to 'Category:ComStar Combat Vehicles' and others like it, I feel that you may be unnecessarily narrowing their scope. For instance, Comstar actually outsourced the production of lot of its equipment to outside companies as it expanded its forces, though pre-Schism at least, a lot of these companies were actually Comstar front companies, or were otherwise heavily controlled or influenced by the Order. Post-schism there was an explosion in technology transfers, licence production agreements and the like between Comstar and genuinely external parties, in both directions, as it tried to regain lost trust while refocusing on joint efforts to defeat the Clans. Echo Mirage (talk) 11:23, 15 May 2022 (EDT)

Royal Scandal

Hey, EM. Apologies if I am wrong, but you seem to have an interest in the Royal units. While taking care of an unrelated problem, I came across one of the SLDF Royal Divisions that has no references! (The scandal!) I don't have the sourcebook, thought I would drop a note in case you do and might be willing to toss a few citations on there: 342nd Royal BattleMech Division--Talvin (talk) 09:28, 18 May 2022 (EDT)

Summon the firing squads! :D I don't have that sourcebook with me at the moment, but I'll have a look around later on and see what I can dig up on it. Thanks for the heads up. Echo Mirage (talk) 11:15, 18 May 2022 (EDT)
No luck so far, apart from the fact it was one of those formations that was not in the normal corps chain of command. I'll keep looking. Echo Mirage (talk) 14:14, 18 May 2022 (EDT)

Xanthos

Hi---I just noticed your edit to the Xanthos page, where you wrote that there was a "much improved version of the Xanthos". Could I ask what source you found the "much improved" descriptor in? I'm not seeing it in any products. --GreekFire (talk) 12:10, 18 May 2022 (EDT)

Evening! The entry on the 81st Mechanized Infantry Division in the 'Field Manual: SLDF' implies that the Xanthos mechs that they received was a improved version of the Xanthos then recently taken into CCAF service, though unfortunately it doesn't go into any real detail. Going by the tone of the entry though, it seemed to be considered to be up to SLDF standards both by the division and the SLDF High Command. I might rewrite that part of the sentence though to avoid any confusion. Thanks for pointing it out. Echo Mirage (talk) 12:28, 18 May 2022 (EDT)
Just read that, and I am not seeing anything to indicate they were other than standard Xanthos. A full battalion, but nothing about them being non-standard.--Talvin (talk) 12:31, 18 May 2022 (EDT)
I feel blind as a bat, but I'm not finding a sentence that implies that they're improved over the -3O myself. I'm sorry to harp on this---I just want to make sure that there's not a missing variant on the MUL here. --GreekFire (talk) 12:32, 18 May 2022 (EDT)
No problem, it is quite possible that I've read too much into the text myself. Echo Mirage (talk) 12:35, 18 May 2022 (EDT)
For the moment, I'll alter the language in the article a bit. Echo Mirage (talk) 12:38, 18 May 2022 (EDT)
Since there doesn't seem to be the word "improved" anywhere in FM:SLDF, that edited text remains speculative in nature. I'm going to go ahead and make a few more adjustments to make sure the text aligns with the printed material. --GreekFire (talk) 12:56, 18 May 2022 (EDT)
Ok, though I fear that it may unintentionally give the impression that the Division was using junk 'Mechs. Echo Mirage (talk) 13:08, 18 May 2022 (EDT)
Sarna has to stick with published, canon material. In this case, unless I'm missing a passage, canon does not state that the Xanthos BattleMechs were upgraded in any way. As such, writing that they're upgraded does not fall into the factual policy of the wiki, no matter what the assumed tech levels of a military may be. --GreekFire (talk) 13:14, 18 May 2022 (EDT)