|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | == Warrior House(s) ==
| + | :''[[User talk:Frabby/Archive1|Archive 1]]'' (created 04 January 2012) |
| | + | :''[[User talk:Frabby/Archive2|Archive 2]]'' (created 01 January 2013) |
| | + | :''[[User talk:Frabby/Archive3|Archive 3]]'' (created 03 January 2014) |
| | + | :''[[User talk:Frabby/Archive4|Archive 4]]'' (created 04 January 2018) |
| | + | :''[[User talk:Frabby/Archive5|Archive 5]]'' (created 07 January 2021) |
| | | | |
| − | Why did you move Warrior Houses to Warrior House? Shouldn't the article title be plural, since it discusses all of them? --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 19:13, 8 December 2007 (CST)
| + | Feel free to leave a message. :) |
| | | | |
| − | :I guess that was my first impression, too (admittedly I did not consciously think about it). However, when mentioned in other articles you can expect single Warrior Houses to be adressed and the link would then be used in singular form, i.e. [ [Warrior House]] [ [Imarra]]. I noticed that when updating my [[Kaifeng]] article.
| + | As of 07 Jan 2021, I archived all content on my talk page because I reckon there were no pending issues. |
| − | :Btw I considered making Warrior Houses a Category but thought it pointless for only 8 entries. In the future the individual Houses may have individual entries, but for now I felt there just is not enough material to warrant this. If and when that happens, a singular title for the main article will be even more important. I am not against moving the article to plural form but then a redirect from the singular would be neccessary imho. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 19:20, 8 December 2007 (CST)
| |
| − | ::No matter which way you do it, you'll have a redirect. It was just my impression that the plural was more accurate. Any help you could contribute to the "Warrior Houses" section I created at [[Capellan Confederation Armed Forces]] would also be appreciated. --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 19:39, 8 December 2007 (CST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | Thanks for cleaning up the various Warrior House Re-directs! [[User:Alkemita|Alkemita]] 09:40, 12 March 2009 (PDT)
| + | == The Nellus Academy Incident == |
| | + | Hi Frabby,<br> |
| | + | Have you read ''[[The Nellus Academy Incident]]''? I've just finished reading it, and there are a few details in it that are making the canon-processing part of my brain itch a little. [[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 16:49, 9 January 2021 (EST) |
| | + | :Read it via BattleCorps; I also have the PoD standing on my shelf. Was going to produce a proper article, but since it ultimately seems like a side story of little relevance it got pushed back. I think I know what itches your brain though. :) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 01:33, 10 January 2021 (EST) |
| | + | ::I'm going to keep reading the author's books - it was a good YA SF read - but I singled out three things that felt anachronistic to me: sending messages to and from Nestor via the jump point of somewhere near Gienah without an HPG, the presence of a COM-2Dr ''Commando'' which is a Jihad-era refit according to TRO-3085 in a novel set in 3067 (with it being a well-known enough variant for FWL cadets to recognise) and the ending section where the four-hundred thousand tonne ''Monolith'' class JumpShip was accompanied by WarShips "more than twice its mass" which at the time, can only be the ''Fylgia'' and ''Yggdrasil'', which seemed a bit of a stretch... I'd been thinking of trying to write up the summary for the webpage, but I'm not sure how to reconcile novels being the highest level of canon with these odd details. [[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 03:13, 10 January 2021 (EST) |
| | | | |
| − | == DropShip == | + | == Fortune Charlie == |
| | + | Hi Frabby, I have not re-read the books, but from what you say, I nevertheless thing temporarily we should keep the information there and link to Operation CERBERUS once done, otherwise this piece of lore would be easily forgotten (at least for me).--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 07:21, 12 January 2021 (EST) |
| | + | :Cerberus and its sub-commands is covered in quite some depth in the novella ''[[A Splinter of Hope]]''. If and when I get around to doing an article on Cerberus, Task Force Styx and Fortune Charlie within it will likely feature rather prominently. But I firmly believe Fortune Charlie should only be a redirect to the proper operation that it was a small part of. Calling Fortune Charlie a unit is at least misleading if not outright false, and as such I felt I couldn't just leave it there. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 04:57, 13 January 2021 (EST) |
| | + | ::I read it yesterday, and it is true what you say. As members of "Fortune Charlie", only one unit is spoken by name, the others are considered an assorted mix of units, like Jihad era conglomerate of small mercenary commands by Devlin Stone. |
| | | | |
| − | Wanted to tell you how I think you've /really/improved the article. Exellent job! --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 10:39, 9 December 2007 (CST)
| + | ::Once you have full article though, we should redirect this page to the section that specifically explains what "Fortune Charlie" represents.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 05:22, 13 January 2021 (EST) |
| − | :Thanks for the flowers. However, to be honest I think the article (and others) still require a lot of work on their references. I often fail to provide references myself because sometimes I do remember certain bits and pieces of information but cannot recall where they are from, and most of the time do not have the novels or sourcebooks anymore. So unfortunately, somebody else will have to do that part of the work... [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 17:09, 18 December 2007 (CST)
| |
| − | ::Agree. It'll happen in time. (What would we do with our lives if this encyclopedia were comple?) --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 01:18, 19 December 2007 (CST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == MechWarrior I == | + | ==Emblematic Mech== |
| | + | Hello |
| | + | I finally take the time to write the [[Essay: Emblematic 'Mechs]] like you advise me to do almost a month ago (I had a lot of works before :(). I don't really feel like it's a true essay. I just extracted and centralized information dispersed in other articles, without putting thought or arguments. After, I have no idea if there is a better way to categorize it and you have far more knowledge on that than I. I would be very grateful if you can look at it and tell me what you think of it. |
| | + | [[User:Dermenore|Dermenore]] ([[User talk:Dermenore|talk]]) 16:48, 21 January 2021 (EST) |
| | | | |
| − | Great job on the MW I page, Frabby! I really liked how detailed you made it, especially given all of the links to the other elements. Great job and it definitely brought some old memories to the surface for me. :) Thanks! [[User:Bdevoe|Bdevoe]] 15:55, 29 January 2008 (CST)
| + | ==Images for individual starships== |
| | + | Hiya, I wanted to ask you to refrain from putting generic ship class images into articles about individual vessels, like in the ''[[Full Moon]]'' article. There is a less than 1% chance that this image is actually showing the ''Full Moon'' out of the 106 ''Potemkin''s ever built. Please only use images that are confirmed, or at least reasonably likely, to depict the specific vessel in question. I feel using generic images is like putting a regular ''Centurion'' image into the infobox of the ''Yen-Lo-Wang'' article just because ''Yen-Lo-Wang'' is a ''Centurion''. If there is no picture for a specific starship then so be it. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 15:07, 31 January 2021 (EST) |
| | + | ::Frappy, do you know the long ODDS of individual Warship picture to be created? Likelness is 1% it will ever be made. That's crazy Frabby. Unless something special is made, i think that sort policy is bit going too far. --[[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] ([[User talk:Wrangler|talk]]) 19:36, 4 February 2021 (EST) |
| | + | :::::I'm afraid this where we have to '''"Agree, to disagree"'''. This a Warship, not a person with thinking mind or a unique one-off vessel. You can't capture EVERYTHING. I think your being too specific. This my personal view. Specially with BattleTech, Warships are least love units aside from ProtoMechs by some element of our fandom/gamedom. Warship is a Warship unless it's a variant. Frabby, the thing is that Full Moon, is a Clan 3057 version. Technical Readout: 3057 Revised spells it out that Clans changed their ships in this specific case. Mk39 looks like old Vincent from 2750. That's been established. Yet there now 2 kinds of McKennas. Completely different, like much of 2750 ships such as with Aegis specially, but again. 3057 Revised spell out which one is which when it happened. I think your going too far with this. Mjolnir for instance looks same as the sister ship. There no individual pictures of now destroyed second ship. As again, i think your being too picky. I say again, "Agree, to disagree". Your one main editors now here, i'm just some body who helps out since i can't complete in editing and my work isn't as close to people who those who here daily. What you say goes, i personally thing your going too far on dead end subject. I will do as you say, i think your in wrong this. I don't want be banned. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] ([[User talk:Wrangler|talk]]) 15:44, 6 February 2021 (EST) |
| | | | |
| − | == Planets and their coordinates == | + | ==Developer Insights== |
| − | Thanks for the help on the planets. It's a bit of work and you're doing a great job adding in the extra data! [[User:Bdevoe|Bdevoe]] 20:13, 26 October 2007 (CDT)
| + | I read a [https://bg.battletech.com/forums/general-discussion/recognition-guide-ilclan-discussion-part-2/msg1698319/#msg1698319 post on the official forum] that had great insight into the changes to the Tukayyid "C" 'Mech record sheets. I feel like that would be great information to archive here in some way, but I'm not sure how. A link in the 'Mech article notes might work, but the BT forum are far from permanent. Any ideas or opinions?--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 14:32, 18 February 2021 (EST) |
| − | :Glad it's appreciated! But I have a number of points: Some of the source material is ambigous Canon, how do we treat that? (For example, data from roleplaying scenarios like the stuff I have on Suk II) Also, the X/Y coordinates of systems are obviously wrong. Are these based on the 3031 Atlas of the Inner Sphere (which I have here, in German)? If so I could start to correct the coordinates. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 05:09, 27 October 2007 (CDT)
| + | :It's probably gonna be important when trying to explain that, and why, the "C" configurations were retconned to what was now established. As a first thought, perhaps copy that post into an Essay type article and link to that in the 'Mech articles whenever a "C" variant is discussed. |
| − | ::I've noted to [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] that the coordinates were incorrect. The entries were autogenerated and obviously there was an error when it posted the entries. I believe the info came from the Inner Sphere Cartography Service maps (which are correct except for two planets) and '''that''' data was based on the 1987/88 House Books. I think the plan is that he'll correct it using some script when he has time to deal with it since it's every planet that's wrong. To your other point, I would tend to think that if the information was published by FASA/WizKids/FanPro it's canon, even if it's from a scenario pack (like the Black Widows Company book). I guess it's up to you as to whether you're willing to go through all of the planets and fix the coordinates - it seems a Herculean task and would probably be easier to wait for Nic to do it automagically. :) [[User:Bdevoe|Bdevoe]] 12:10, 27 October 2007 (CDT)
| + | :In the past I used to archive such information on the pertinent talk page; but this is different as it is not exactly a ruling, and also much longer. So I think it needs to be treated differently. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 14:46, 18 February 2021 (EST) |
| − | ::::Hi Frabby, sorry to jump in and resurrect a old conversation. I noticed there a missing planet that is alive. Von Strang's World, was a world that Clan Jade Falcon currently holds, its on Periphery border of their Occuaptional Zone. It was invaded 3071 by [[Clan Ice Hellion]], during their little attempt to hijack Falcon's worlds. Was the planet not original published somewhere, that its was left out of Sarna's planet list? Its slight north of both [[Botany Bay]] & [[Last Chance]]. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 19:10, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | ::I like the "essay" idea. I have PM'd the author for permission to copy.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 19:51, 18 February 2021 (EST) |
| − | :::::Yeah, BTW was set up with an obsolete version of the [http://www.isatlas.teamspam.net/ Teamspam IS Atlas]. A number of worlds are misplaced and lots are missing altogether. Von Strang's World is actually one of the better known periphery worlds even though it's missing here as of yet. Sooner or later we'll have to redo the maps anyways. In the meantime, I have this project over at CBT forum seeking [http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=34841.0 Unnamed, lost or misnamed planets]. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 19:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::::Would be out of the question to setup a place holder page for the planet? I believe there enough basic information on it justify a planet page for it, with exception of actual numbers on where it is. I actually thinking Coordinates in future publication is likely a thing of the past. Way I see the Writers are trying streamline things and avoid having be errant for them, don't think we'll get new Coordinates or planet data like there were in the old books. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 11:16, 23 April 2010 (UTC) | |
| − | :::::::::By all means, go ahead! I plan to add each and every one of those unmapped, lost or misnamed planets to BTW eventually, provided that nobody else does it first, but I really don't claim them for myself and help is appreciated. As for the coordiantes, there are maps in canonical sources from which you can guesstimate the coordinates with reasonable accuracy (which is the case for most periphery systems anyways); it is suggested that if you estimate the coordinates, this should be indicated in a footnote when presenting the data in the article. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 01:01, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Hunan == | + | ==Sam Lewis in Wolves on the Border== |
| | + | Hey Frabby, |
| | | | |
| − | I'm glad that you found the wrong co-ordinates for Gotterdammerung. I was wondering if you could take a look in your atlas of the Inner Sphere for [[Hunan]]. It's placed on the map here to the northeast of New Avalon, but it's listed as being part of the Capellan confederation and as having been part of the Terran Hegemony. I think this must be wrong, but I have no way of checking it. If it's possible, could you take a look? | + | I have just done a search in my ebook copy of [[Wolves on the Border]] for [[Sam Lewis (Scientist)|Sam Lewis]]. I can't find any mention of him in the book.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 09:18, 4 March 2021 (EST) |
| | | | |
| − | Follow up: The co-ordinates are listed as: (X: 333.04 Y: 333.04)
| + | :Checked my print books, and ayup, you're right: It's one Prof. McGuffin (!!) who was mentioned along Dr. Banzai for the Jump Stabilizer. Seems I plainly misremembered. The reference to Professor-General Sam Lewis was in [[Warrior: Coupe]] instead, according to his article here. Might as well have looked there first. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 11:00, 4 March 2021 (EST) |
| | | | |
| − | Thanks, --[[User:Workerbee|Workerbee]] 09:41, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
| + | == Image Categories == |
| − | :It is located in the triangle formed by [[New Aragon]], [[St. Andre]] and [[Foochow]], fairly exactly "north" of [[Zaurak]] and [[Kaifeng]]. The Atlas gives the coordinates as X: 73,04 Y: 96,76
| |
| − | :Btw it is a known problem that the planet's X/Y coordinates are wrong. When the entries were auto-generated, the X-coordinate were erroneously put into both the X and Y slot. Nic is aware of this and it will hopefully be corrected in a future update. (See [[Category talk:Planets# Major Problem with Coords]]). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 13:10, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Thanks again. --[[User:Workerbee|Workerbee]] 15:24, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ::Wouldn't that be (73.04, '''-'''96.76?), as Hunan is "south" of Terra? Since you've become the planetary coordinate guru, would you be able to check and make sure that the [http://cf.sarna.net/data/planets/iscs/planall.zip master file] has as that data correct? I've already corrected Menkent, Blue Diamond, Gotterdammerung, and Hunan. Specifically, could you check out [[Sakhalin]], [[Scituate]], [[Cartago]], and [[Chamdo]]? Thanks! --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 17:42, 1 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Yes, you are absolutely right: Hunan is at Y -96.76, sorry! Regarding the others:
| |
| − | *There are in fact two systems by the name of Sakhalin: One is a CapCon/Sarna Supremacy world at X: 62.33 Y: -142.92, the other a Lyran world at X: -24.25 Y: 153.09. The one on this wiki is the CapCon world, Sakhalin (LC) is missing as of yet. I had already noted it on the article some time ago (CC/SS world is spelled Sachalin in German material, but not in the original English sources).
| |
| − | *Scituate has X: 88.67 Y: -221.94 in my Atlas. The wiki apparently used a positive Y coord, as it is erroneously shown at approximately the same altitude as Mannedorf (which is Y: 228.98).
| |
| − | *Cartago placement seems to be correct (at X: 141.09 Y: -10.17)
| |
| − | *Chamdo placement also seems to be correct (at X: 10.43 Y: -153.61); however, in the immediate vicinity [[Yunnah]] seems to be slightly misplaced. The correct coordinates for Yunnah are X: 27.67 Y: -124.13. It ''should'' be halfway between [[Corey]] and [[Second Try]] but here it is erroneously shown on the same altitude as [[Tsinghai]] and Chamdo, at Y: -153.61.
| |
| − | Checking the big file? I am honored, but it is a daunting task. It will take time. (Add the fact that some names were actually ''translated'' into German, i.e. ''Second Try'' is named ''Zweitversuch'' (lit.: Second Try) in German. That one could be guessed, but it literally took me a year to figure that ''Rand'' is meant to be ''The Edge''...
| |
| − | | |
| − | Oh, and then there is that issue with "missing planets". It grew to quite a collection on the CBT forum, and there are other cases. This wiki, for example, has [[Ferris]] (Outworld Alliance) but there seems to be another Ferris in the Oberon Confederation which as of yet is not mentioned here. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 18:17, 1 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | ::The file does have Sakhalin (LC) at the correct coordinates. It has Scituate at 88.67,221.94 so that is incorrect. Yunnah is a tad off at 27.64,-154.13. Both have been corrected. It is daunting, I agree... but something does need to be done about the planets that are not represented, especially the planets of the Marian Hegemony and Circinus Federation. I also feel like Clan planets should be added, as well as those in the Deep Periphery, but that's a whole separate issue. --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 18:46, 1 June 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Shrapnel == | |
| − | | |
| − | A bit late, but good work on the article. I was surprised to see an early product with such an extensive article. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 10:35, 4 July 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | :Again, thanks - it is nice to see that my work is appreciated. I intend to eventually create pages for all the BT novels I have and provide a plot synopsis, timeframe, list of characters, list of major events for each. The intention is to give a full (yet reasonably brief) content rundown for each product on this wikia. But that is a huge undertaking, and currently queued behind Canonicity debate/policy (something I hope will be hammered out between Scaletail and myself), and stellar cartography. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 01:25, 5 July 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Charakter==
| |
| − | Gotta ask you: is the mis-spelling an affection of your's or just somehow a common mistake you make? I've seen you spell it both ways here, but now came across the k-spelling on CBT, as well. Just curious.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Also, I was waiting on your input on the Canon talk page, before I move forward on a section-by-section discussion/development. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 23:15, 17 August 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :I have to say common mistake. "Charakter" is German. Being a GM, I use (and write) the word so often that the German spelling sometimes creeps through even when I write in English. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 03:11, 18 August 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::Good to know. Your English is impeccable, if that is the only evidence of it being a second language creeping in. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 08:38, 18 August 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Cyclops ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Good find, on the errata. Especially since it was an old thread. I went ahead and made a reference for the link you provided, to prevent and calls of doubt in the future. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 21:29, 25 August 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == E-mail ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | I just sent you an e-mail thru the BTW system. Please review when you get the opportunity. Thanks.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 16:13, 30 August 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Hunter ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Thanks for fixing all those links. I meant to get around to it, but you beat me! --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 13:15, 13 September 2008 (CDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Unsuited Content ==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby. Would you please take a look at [[Seraphin]] and [[Seraphin Mechwarrior]]? I think they're articles better suited for the [http://battletechfanon.wikia.com/wiki/BattleTech_Fanon_Wiki Fanon Wiki]. Thanks for the help. --[[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]] 21:29, 30 November 2008 (PST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Technically, this kind of fanon articles is allowed on Sarna.net, provided that it is marked as fanon/non-canon. This goes back to the origins of this wiki, which started out as a fansite. I will, however, add the appropriate Non-Canon flags to the articles. Thanks for spotting. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 06:37, 1 December 2008 (PST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::Should we start encouraging members to move fanon to the Fanon Wiki? --[[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]] 06:59, 1 December 2008 (PST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :::Personally, yes. But the Policy to allow fanon stands, and I feel uncomfortable with changing this all by myself. Consider that this was originally a fan-site for Neveron, and only later evolved into a true BT Wikia. I also thought that providing a dedicated fanon wikia should channel fanon away from this wikia. Anyways, I suggest you try to drum up support from [[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] and especially [[User:Nicjansma|NicJansma]]. They are the ones to decide on this matter as far as I am concerned. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 07:30, 1 December 2008 (PST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == List of minor mercenary units ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Yeoman's work dude! [[User:Communibus locis|Locis]] 06:49, 3 December 2008 (PST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Lock the Main Page ==
| |
| | | | |
| | Hi Frabby, | | Hi Frabby, |
| | | | |
| − | The [[Main Page]] was hit by vandalism again. Since it's the public face of the site, I really believe it should be locked to all but administrators. There's really no reason anyone else should edit it anyway. --[[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]] 06:56, 8 January 2009 (PST)
| + | 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]]) 04:22, 8 March 2021 (EST) |
| − | :Makes sense. I had anticipated it would be locked anyways, so I'm going to do it now. What worries me a bit is that these spambots actually created user accounts. Will bring this up with the site owner, [[User:Nicjansma|Nic Jansma]]. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 07:36, 8 January 2009 (PST)
| |
| − | ::I wasn't there when it happened, but I approve this request, as it is really important to not see our favorite site spammed with viagra offers. --[[User:FIVE-one|FIVE-one]] 07:37, 8 January 2009 (PST)
| |
| − | :Update: The front page is already protected (against edits by non-registered users I presume). If I have an admin button to lock it beyond that then I have not found it. Nic should be able to help. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 07:41, 8 January 2009 (PST)
| |
| − | ::You'll need someone with "sysop" access. --[[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]] 12:15, 8 January 2009 (PST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==WikiProject Military Commands==
| |
| − | I created a new [[BattleTechWiki:Project Military Commands|WikiProject]] to encompass all military commands. Since you've done a lot of work in the past with them, please come over and sign up so that we can improve the coverage of all units. --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 14:16, 14 February 2009 (PST)
| |
| − | :I have deliberately avoided signing into any specific Projects, and stick to my own to-do list instead. Well, sort of... Of course that does not mean I don't approve! It's just that I feel there is no point in me pinning my name to any particular projects. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 14:50, 16 February 2009 (PST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Thanks for the Help!==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby, thanks for helping me with my problem.
| |
| − | I'm very new to wikipedia use. I'm uncertain on how to use the other command such as move.
| |
| − | I suspected that i won't been able re-name article i had created for security purposes.
| |
| − | Thanks again for helping me and opening my eyes to the move function.
| |
| − | -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 14:06, 24 March 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Category Creation==
| |
| − | Hello Frabby, I'm uncertain whom would be person to speak with regarding this.
| |
| − | I've added few vehicles to the Sarna.net which aren't new in some respects.
| |
| − | I've added the [[Ibex RV]] civilian vehicle from the [[Handbook: House Marik]].
| |
| − | This is a civilian vehicle, is it possible to add a Civilian Vehicles category?
| |
| − | There are other civilian vehicles listed in the handbooks as well as Vehicle Annex.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Also could category of Naval Vessel Support Vehicles be added? It is a geniune battletech vehicle listing. I've added two support vehicle which happen to fall under sub-directory of Naval Support Support Vessel.
| |
| − | Thank you for your time! -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 16:37, 24 March 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :To the best of my knowledge, categories are auto-created when articles (at least two) are sorted into a given category. You can then go to the category page and edit in some explanatory text if you want. I think this is how I created the [[:Category:Alien species]]. If you run into problems, let me know.
| |
| − | :As for Naval Vessels, there are so few designs that I would put all canonical sea-going ships into one category; suggest you name it Blue Water Naval Vehicles (but really, if you can find a better name then use that instead!). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 13:34, 25 March 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::Wet naval vessels already have a couple of categories reserved for them already, based upon the chassis, as is consistent with other combat vehicles. Check out the [[BattleTechWiki:Combat Vehicle Portal|Combat Vehicle Portal]] for them. --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 16:55, 25 March 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | :::Support Vehicles offical classification of Battletech. Their own class. Naval Support Vehicle is sub-class. My only thing since their not used for regular play, then they won't be listed as general combat vehicles. Hense why I'm hesitant to giving them classification "combat vehicle". Naval listing are only for the 100 tons and below stuff, not the massive support vehicles that can get into the 100k range. I'll list Argo and the Luftenberg as combatvehicles if you want me too but i think its wrong category for them. Can we least have the Civilian Vehicle Category thou? == [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 17:22, 26 March 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | ::::I started a discussion at [[Category talk:Support Vehicles]] --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 17:50, 26 March 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == BattleCorps ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | I saw your post of the BC forums. Just so you're aware, I did start and wrote a couple of articles: [[Destiny's Call]], [[Tears of Blood]], & [[Isolation's Weight]]. --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 17:09, 25 March 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Clan Nova Cat Characters category request ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Hi Frabby, is possible for the creation for category for Clan Nova Cat characters? There has been number of exclusive character profiles created for that clan, but there is no category listed yet. Can it be created? I am little fuzzy on what process is to have category created or to whom i need speak to. Thank you! -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 07:47, 9 May 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Unholy Union ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Good job, Frabby, with that article on the BC story. Well-developed article, provides the facts with out removing the impetus for reading the story oneself. I'm really glad to see this type of article making its way here. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 07:22, 31 May 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == BattleCorps II ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | I just created a new article called [[Echoes In the Void]], using the How To template for BC stories, which includes the category for BC stories. However, when I went to visit the category, I saw it had been deleted by you. Is there a reason we are not to categorize BC stories? If you could point me to that discussion, if it exists, I'd appreciate it. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 08:30, 18 June 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | :The category is essentially still there. "BattleCorps" was deleted because we have expanded its scope and re-created it as [[:Category:BattleCorps publications]], to make it clearer that it also includes other publications with important information, like scenarios or the essay from Ardath Mayhar. I was not aware of this How To template or I would have updated it accordingly.
| |
| − | :(I have just looked for the template you mentioned to update it but couldn't find it...) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 10:20, 18 June 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | ::I was talking about [[Help:CreateBattleCorpsStoryArticle|this one]], which I've gone ahead and updated. Thanks for the quick reply. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 11:38, 18 June 2009 (PDT)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Poke-poke ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | *[[User_talk:Nicjansma#Other_extension_suggestions]]: comment requested. :p --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 20:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Thanks for Covering My Backside ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | ...on [http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,54067.msg1317154.html#msg1317154 this]. Sometimes I forget that not everyone was awake for reading comprehension lessons back in high school. Not only did you catch this, but you explained it much more clearly than I had. I can only imagine how the rumor would have spread out of control in you hadn't stepped in as quickly as you did. (Makes me think of another ribbon award idea...) --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 19:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==MM-1 MiningMech==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby, I know have article regaring MM-1 MiningMech, but i suggest to rename it from MiningMech to MM-1 MiningMech since its name conflicts with Dark Age MiningMech. Since someone going to this article, well be confused on which miningMech is what. I plan add the MiningMech to the list of article. However, its going be called MiningMech (Dark Age) since the conflict with your article. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 21:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :When I created that article I followed the naming scheme for 'Mech articles, but you are right: MiningMech denotes a type of 'Mechs more than an individual model. MM-1 MiningMech is like naming a BattleMech the BM-1 BattleMech. I'll move the article as per your suggestion and will create a disambiguation page of some sorts under "MiningMech". [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 11:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Canon Article Question==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby, question. I wrote some months ago regarding to subject of [[Canon Rumor]]. Which is another thing they write about. I'm no where near writer you are, do you wish me to remove the article? SOme of newer fiction in the sources book have this un-offical explaination. I'm not sure if your Canon article covers it. Since i'm using crude wording to describe the subject. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 12:29, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Thanks for the information. The Canon Rumour article seems sound, and I see no reason to remove it. It covers essentially the same subject that I included in the Canon article under "optional canon" though. Is "Canon Rumour" an expression that was ever officially used? If so then the "Optional Canon" section needs to be renamed accordingly. I can see two ways to proceed, either the Canon Rumour article is merged into Canon (with a redirect put in its place) or simply a "see also" link from the Canon article. Opinions? [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 13:36, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Only reason why i've used the "Canon Rumor", its been used by various individuals in describing certain articles since creation of the Interstellar Players source books. Though, its be described as being rumors that are canon. Meaning, in the game itself urban legends, anything described by being in game rumors are considered Rumor, that are canon. Thus my usage of Canon Rumor. I'm not so hot on using the Optional Canon as description. Since canon rumors are all over the Jihad Hot Spots books and their not necessary optional. I'd think having them merged into one article with your Canon would make sense. I believe name "Canon Rumor" should be retained. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 20:27, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Canon==
| |
| − | I am afraid that Herb is suffering from a severe case of NIH (Not Invented Here), ie, if it wasn't written himself or by one of the 'cabal', he doesn't want any part of it since he can't twist it to fit his particular vision of the BT Universe. There's just no room for really fresh blood or out of the box innovations that still make a lot of sense like having real combat DropShips larger than 20ktons (Someone's arm had to be twisted really, really hard to allow the Tiamat to be published) [[User:Tekteam26|Tekteam26]] 17:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Well, I guess that's the [[Line Developer]]'s privilege... he gets to decide what's what. As for the reasons, I was more under the impression that legal rights to the BattleTechnology publications were unclear, and thus a problem to be avoided at all costs following the Macross debacle. Seems like the BT brand learned a painful lesson there (an not neccessarily the right one, but who am I to judge their decisions). On the bright side, there's people like [[User:Cray]] in the BT writing staff with impeccable knowlege of scientific workings. By the way, I assume you're the same Tekteam26 as over at the CBT forum, right? [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 17:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Actually, I learned from hard experience that the legal rights are unclear about material published in BattleTechnology and MFQ, until you want to draw from something that you had published in those magazines for the CBT forums, then TPTB quickly take ownership of the rights and say 'NO! you can't post material from those pubs.' even if you were the original author of the article.[[User:Tekteam26|Tekteam26]] 18:41, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Yep, I'm one and the same. Mind you, Cray isn't the only one with quite a bit of knowledge of scientific workings (BS Engineering Operations, NC State University but taking lots of coursework in Aerospace Engineering), not to mention my 27 years of service in the military between active duty and reserve components doing a job that I really don't want to mention in a public posting due to its sensitive nature. It was a bit curious that the Tiamat was virtually identical to a design proposal that I had shared with Herb about a year and a half ago. (and yes, I still have a copy of the email that I sent to Herb with the design data)[[User:Tekteam26|Tekteam26]] 00:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | BTW, I updated the listing for the articles that I have had published in BattleTechnology and MechForce Quarterly.[[User:Tekteam26|Tekteam26]] 00:54, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==TekTeam article==
| |
| − | Hello, Frabby. I've been updating the unit page for TekTeam Technical Services. It is based on the published work but I have also expanded upon the unit history. I hope to continue to fill in the blanks and expand upon it. What do you think of the unit profile so far?[[User:Tekteam26|Tekteam26]] 23:15, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :To be honest, I would prefer if only published material (whatever information is found in MechForce Quarterly/BattleTechnology articles) is used as a source for the article, as that is the formerly canon, now apocryphal material that is more than mere fan fiction. By contrast, expanding the unit history beyond those published articles is just fan fiction at this point and should be segregated into an article section of its own or even a separate article. (see our [[Policy:Canon]] [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 07:25, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Question about timeline ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Hy I adding in last time some stuff to the timeline and yearlist....I think the organisation structure of the timeline and yearlist sites can be updated...in right date times(i hope it is the right word) and give the site a structure!?!? What are you think or the other members....????
| |
| − | | |
| − | I want to do this work....but it is a lot to do...!!
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 12:14, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :I do agree that the timeline could be improved, yes. And even more yes, it is a huge task. Personally, I have no idea how it could be done, nor have been active on the timeline, so I suggest you raise your point on [[Talk:Timeline]]. That should bring the people who are also interested in the timeline to comment and help you. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 14:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :: Thanks for the answer hopefully I becom some support!!!!
| |
| − | Greetings [[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 15:49, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Template colors ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Hey, Frabby: I will say I like some of the source-specific templates (Nevron, games, etc.), but dislike the color schemes. In my perspective, using the Sarna gold for non-warnings is best. Templates -when used sparingly- will bring the eye directly to themselves. The other colors clash, in my opinion, with the general site layout. And I definitely feel that the red (of fanon) should only be reserved for personal talk-page warnings of the lvl 3 & 4 variety. My recommendation is to set all templates back to either Sarna gold or white. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 13:54, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :I honestly did not realize there was any Sarna coloring scheme, and even now that you pointed it out to me my feeling is that the Canonicity issue is more important, and should be color-coded. I was going by the old traffic-light scheme: Red for "Bad" aka Non-canon & Fanon (the latter is actually a tad bit "redder"), Yellow for Apocrypha and Green for other (since blue would make the links disappear). But I really do not have a strong opinion on this and could live with it if there is a consensus that the templates should be de-colored. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 14:00, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::To be honest, there is no policy (or even written discussion) about this, that I know of; its just in my early design of the site, I went with what Nic had established (via presence) and designed the warning templates based on my 'pedia experience. As always, I'm open-minded regarding changing my POV, but the hurdle is the clash of the colors. What value do you see in color coding by non-canon source? (As an aside, I've seen the newly revealed policy, but haven't commented because nothing has leapt out as counter to the original intent of the policy. I'm working from the assumption that you've cleaned up the policy to address what we've agreed upon in the past, so haven't yet taken a critical look. I will give you feedback one way or the other.) --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 14:25, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Fan Stories being posted==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby, I've spotted someone posting lengthy fan-stories on the boards. Litterly going from Chapter to Chapter. Is that something allowed? It has seperate article pages per chapters. Its pretty lengthy. [http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Soumi_Warders]. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 19:28, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Yep, it's allowed (see our [[Policy:Notability]] and [[Policy:Canon]]). The stories are appropriately marked as Fanon. I would prefer pure Fanon content to exclusively go on the BT Fanon Wiki instead, but owing to BTW's origin as a fansite, Fanon is expressly allowed here. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 07:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Lost Worlds==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby, hope things are well with you. I remember you were on a thread on Classic Battletech forums regarding lost worlds. I recently wrote up profile for the [[Raventhir's Iron Hand]] which shows unit had fought on world of Cranston in 2580 which earn them actual name of Magestry Guard (older name). This from the old Field Manual: Periphery. Anyways, Cranston appears to be not listed on Sarna.net. Lookin at Handbook: Major Periphery States, i've noticed that the world indeed shows up maps for 2571 and then in 2750 as part of Free World League. Do you have a project or someone have project where were going add these dead worlds to the Sarna? -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 01:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
| |
| − | :I have a big thread ongoing over at CBT.com ([http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=34841.0 Unmapped, lost or misnamed systems]). Within this wiki, I always wanted to include that data once I get round to finally working on systems/planets proper. But I have not yet started anything. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 10:30, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Awards ==
| |
| − | Frabby, I took the liberty of installing an awards board on your main page. Please place it where it best fits your design. Happy New Year! --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 05:00, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Thanks! :) And a Happy New Year to you as well! [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 15:41, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Carsphairn ==
| |
| − | Would you please take a look [[Talk:Carsphairn|here]]? Thnks. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 23:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Looks like Ebakunin beat me to it. Although the altered spelling is interesting to note. Will do some research if the DA spelling is in error, and include the result in my list on the CBT forum. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 15:41, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Objective Raids: 3067 ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Frabby,
| |
| − | 1) I feel like the new tag you applied to the [[Objective Raids: 3067|article]] is nearly the opposite of what it should say. It does ''provide'' (maybe not 'contribute') canonical, but ''is not'' official. That and your comment regarding meta-sources leads me to think maybe we should discuss setting up such a tag.
| |
| − | | |
| − | 2) Curious: why did you delete the address to the original release venue, CBT forums?
| |
| − | | |
| − | 3) Also, didn't mean to step on your idea to create the article, but I was inspired by MadCap's confusion on how to upload a file and thought best to get it going. You made good edits to it. Thanks. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 15:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :1) Yeah, maybe the NonCanonProduct tag needs some tweaking. It is essentially supposed to say "You cannot cite this source as a canonical reference". The bit about official crept in because the first article I did where the tag was actually used was [[Critter-TEK]] - which does technically fall under official products, but was never even intended to be canonical. Wheter or not it "provides" canonical data is irrelevant imho, because if it does that then it must have taken that canonical data from somewhere and that somewhere is the real source.
| |
| − | :2) As for the adress reference, I have included links to the [[CBT Forums]] quite a lot recently but haven't yet come round to actually write that article. I felt it would be appropriate to add that redlink in that case. Links to external sites should generally be restricted to sectinos like "See also" and "References".
| |
| − | :3) Knowing myself, I would not have created the article for a couple of months down the line. It means nothing to me who created a given article, and I certainly would not want people to refrain from adding content because they wait for me. It could be a long wait... :) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 18:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::1) Got it. Putting it that way ("...it must have taken that canonical data from somewhere and that somewhere is the real source.") I can't help but agree. I think the new tag represents that position well.
| |
| − | ::2) Got it. Agree with you that it should be in the below sections. I'm tempted to do just that, to help facilitate the latest revision always being present here.
| |
| − | ::3) Got it. Glad to see I didn't step on any toes. I also thought about responding to BH-whatever's comment about you hosting Sarna, but thought it would look snarky coming from me. Thanks, man. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 21:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Founder's Honorable Mention Award ==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby! I wanted to award you a Founder's Honorable Mention Award for all of your contributions over the last year. It's great to have you part of the community! [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] 06:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Much appreciated. Thanks Nic! [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 22:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Short stories ==
| |
| − | I'm trying to come up with an appropriate name for a category of short stories from canon publications other than BattleCorps, such as those in rulebooks and similar titles. Your [[:Category:BattleCorps publications]] is a good name, for it defines something specific. How do I grab a name for those opening short stories? --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 15:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Incidentially, I've been mulling this problem over as well. This is my suggestion: As long as a given piece of fiction is only present within another product, it should be covered in that product's article (give it its own section). I suppose prominent stories should get redirects. Only when the short story gets published separately it should get a separate article.
| |
| − | :BattleCorps has begun to release those short stories separate from their original products, which turns them into individual BC publications and then they should get their own article as such. (Like Life in the big city from the CityTech rulebook). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 15:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Okay, I can work with that. Might want to write a policy up regarding articles on short stories. I'll support it. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 16:25, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | Update on this issue: I have meanwhile begun to create individual articles for each and every short story, and linked to the stories from their sources (see [[Shrapnel]] for an example). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 22:57, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == XJ90 ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | You can always give him a second [[BattleTechWiki:Awards/CasualEdit_Award|Casual Edit]] ribbon. The gallery in that link shows the system is designed to grow! --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 22:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Hey, I took the liberty of correcting the ribbon display for XJ90. When someone receives a 2nd (or later) award, they replace the existing ribbon with the more senior one. How's that shin? --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 02:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Field Manual Terran Hegemony==
| |
| − | Hy Frabby i found the Field Manual: Terran Hegemony, is it a fancreation or a meta-source.[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 01:31, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :When in doubt, treat it as a fan creation; remember, meta-sources are only those which compile canonical information with some reliability and omit fan-made content either completely or have it clearly marked. Can you provide a link? [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 08:08, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Hy, it is a pdf with 252pages by John Luther, and looks very pretty, i became it from a friend, i talk to him about the link, but i think you find it in the CBT forum.[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 13:30, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | == Infantry weapons and Battletechnology Mag stuff ==
| |
| − | Hi, I have a lot of information about Infantry weapons and equipment from different sources. How could I integrate this material in Sarna.net
| |
| − | . Tnx [[User:Neuling|Neuling]] 23:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC) neuling
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Anything that has to do with BattleTech warrants inclusion on the wiki, as per our [[:Policy:Notability]]. '''[[:Policy:Be bold|Be Bold]]''' and use whatever format you feel is appropriate for your article.
| |
| − | :As a personal opinion, I wouldn't create an individual article for each and every handgun that may ever have been mentioned in a BattleTech source though. Rather, I'd suggest group them together in summary articles/list articles.
| |
| − | :[[:User:PerkinsC]] started something similar some time ago. He created a number of articles on infantry weapons such as "[[Light Machine Gun (infantry weapon)]]", but at a quick glance it seems they are without content so far and flagged for deletion review. You're very welcome to work on these if they fit your idea. He also created the [[:Category:Ballistic Weapons]] where you can find [[Help:CreateInfantryWeaponArticle]]; similar stuff seems to exist for other infantry weapon systems. Hope that helps. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 10:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Name of master category==
| |
| − | Frabby, IRT [[Template talk:Fanon]], what about 'Fan Submissions' for the name of the master category? Fan fiction seems to me to imply stories...and only stories. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 10:59, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Oops, sorry, didn't see your entry on the talk page. Answered there. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 12:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Structure of brigade articles and army overall==
| |
| − | Hi, I think all major brigades need an overwork. I find the structure of the field manual is good an I will change every brigade to this structure. Also the army articles need a revision to the better. Tell me, thats my thinkingwrong or right? [[User:Neuling|Neuling]] 10:55, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :I'd say it is opinion more than logic here. Personally, I am actually quite unhappy with the state of affairs. I dislike the approach that was taken (create an article of every single regiment). Some of these articles are too short, some are way too overloaded with trivial information. Really, what's the point of creating separate articles for each and every regiment of [[McCarron's Armored Cavalry]] when there is next to nothing special about the individual regiments? The entire formation (arguable a brigade) could and should be covered in one single article. Conversely, sometimes even individual companies warrant an article (like [[Sorenson's Sabres]] or [[The Fox's Teeth]]). It's really a question of gut feeling.
| |
| − | :One particularly problematic issue is TOEs and personnel rosters. These aren't set in stone, they change on a weekly bases (sometimes literally). We have seen it on the mercenary unit articles that it is an ardous task to follow the changes here as they wax and wane over time, especially considering how many units have virtual centuries of history to be covered.
| |
| − | :My own vision is perhaps best exemplified in how the [[Warrior House]]s are now depicted: There is an article about the Warrior Houses as a concept, with a general description of the concept and links with brief description for each individual Warrior House; details do not belong into the master article and are instead found in the individual Houses' articles. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 11:19, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Translate please ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Morning, Frabby. Would you please talk with Doneve about [[User_talk:Revanche#Image_Galley|this]] post on my talk page? I'm not sure what he is asking for and since he doesn't provide links (and he makes so many contributions), I really don't have anyway of determining it on my own. Thank you. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 11:05, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Crescent Moon ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | That seems to be the perfect solution, thanks for clearing things up! [[User:RagTag|RagTag]] 11:32, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Vandal Cop award ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Thanks for reverting and blocking the repeat spammer when he struck [[Essay: BattleMech Technology]].
| |
| − | :[[File:VC.jpg|Vandal Cop Award, 1st ribbon]]
| |
| − | It appears he assumed a registered user would be able to get by undetected, but wasn't able to grasp that we have a strong corp of vandal cops. Well, at least he completed three captchas before he could do any harm; more effort on his part.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 11:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == References ==
| |
| − | Frabby, I need your help finding something. A few months ago you persuaded me to change my referencing style. This was after I wrote the [[Help:References]] page. I want to update that page with the 'proper' method (as well as example citations of existing sources), but cannot find our conversation. IIRC, Scaletail took part in it, as well. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 02:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Sorry, couldn't find it either. (Though I dimly remembered something...) You do realize that an advanced search for "pp." on article and user talk pages brings up your talk archive and some other stuff where pp. vs. pg. came up; you put a link to something from wikipedia there somewhere. But beyond that, sorry, can't help. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 17:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::That was helpful; thanks. The "pp." was a great search term afterall and, while I knew about the material in the 2010 archive, the same search showed me the WP you mentioned. I think the discussion I remember was in [[BattleTechWiki talk:Project Biographies]], which you didn't take part, but I did mention you. Again, thanks. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 17:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Material from Tactical Handbook==
| |
| − | Hi, i read the Tactical Handbook again and discover that in this book are many equipment fluff with manufactur and availability. Where can i post it and in which form as overview (table) or in the single articles.... [[User:Neuling|Neuling]] 23:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC) Tnx
| |
| − | :Most individual pieces of equipment have their own article, and that is where the information belongs. If an article for a given item doesn't exist yet, create it yourself. :)
| |
| − | :As for tables, I don't like the idea of creating tables with game data, because that kind of stuff sells books - I fear it might be illegal to put it online, and not covered under the ''fair use'' rule. I even recently suggested we delete articles consisting of such tables (see [[Talk:CBT Tables]]). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 00:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Providing sources ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[Policy_Talk:Images#Providing_sources|Nudge]] --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 18:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Karma ==
| |
| − | Great work with that article. Did you write is as you were reading the novel or go back and actually research that entire plot? --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 18:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Both, in a way. I read the novel to get a general impression, though it was one of the best BT books I ever read, and decided I needed to get an article up on Sarna. Then I re-read it, writing the summary along the text. I feel it always helps when you have read the story before, and know what's important. Still, the plot summary in the article is too long for my taste, but compared to the book it's actually too short; I left out a number of minor scenes for brevity's sake. Ah well. Fair article overall, a tad bit too long, but it does do the job of giving the english-speaking audience an impression of how the story goes. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 19:02, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Cooperation ==
| |
| − | I have a huge project in the near future. I ask you and any other user how is interested for a cooperation effort. My goal is a overall update of the entire unit section. When a user take for example take the DCMS and a other the AFFC it would make it easier for us all. What is your opinion about it. Let me know it and I will discuss the task. [[User:Neuling|Neuling]] 19:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :to but into somebody else's page.. but kinda like this? [[BattleTechWiki:Project Military Commands]] --[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] 19:31, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Battle Value worksheet ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Frabby, please have a look at the template: [[User:Mbear/BVWorksheet]]. Comments welcome.--[[User:Mbear|Mbear]] 14:12, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Harvest Trials ==
| |
| − | I will wrote abour the Harvest Trials / Wars. What is better. Making a break down of every clan how looses and how gaines troops or to descrip the unit an from were it came... [[User:Neuling|Neuling]] 19:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :What would a BTW user expect when he followed a link to "Harvest Trials"? I reckon that article should provide a broad overview first of the wars in general, and then very brief overviews for each individual Clan. Because of the sheer scope of the issue, details probably belong into sub-articles so that the articled doesn't get overly long - remember, it's about the entire topic and not all minute details. Just a suggestion, but perhaps it would be good to put the details into each Clan's history page, and link to that article/subsection from the Harvest Trials article like this:
| |
| − | ::<nowiki>Over the course of the Harvest Trials, Clan Sitting Duck lost the Bazillus Omega facility on Disneyland and their entire holdings on Nowhere to Clan Rabid Vermin, but seized the Neverland holdings from Clan Fish-in-a-Barrel in return. </nowiki>
| |
| − | ::<nowiki>:''For details, see [[Clan Sitting Duck#History]] (section on Harvest Trials)'' </nowiki>
| |
| − | :[[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 21:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Planet Infobox==
| |
| − | Hy Revanche, can I update the Planet Infobox, like the Planetary Data posts on diverse planet pages, then we have all the data in the infobox!I make a test in the sandbox, can you take a look?--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 13:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Hi, Doneve. Two things:
| |
| − | :1 - I'm reluctant to 'authorize' changes to infoboxes, because its clear that there should be a consensus regarding these issues and I am an Editor, just like you.
| |
| − | :2 - I '''do''' support it, as I feel that the planet articles ''really'' need some formalization, such as BattleMechs have enjoyed.
| |
| − | :I recommend you bring it up at [[BattleTechWiki_talk:Project_Planets]], and bring [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] into the discussion. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 13:58, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::Ok, thats fine. I expanded the sand... infobox with a refernce example, where the data comes like the heading reference --Planetar Data....--. [[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 14:04, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :::Hy Frabby, i copyed this discussion from Revanches talk page to you, i write to Rev. about the Planet infobox.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 08:28, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::::Apologies for the late reply. I was touring the past weekend with my wife's band and came back with a serious cold and a big office workload carryover, so I'm not much use currently. That said, I do have plans for a Project:Systems and will be back on the topic eventually. (I seem to recall I wrote stuff about my vision, but couldn't find it at a quick glance.) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 14:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::Hy, ok i notize this, if you need help when you start your project talk to me.Greetings --[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 16:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Dechan Fraser... ==
| |
| − | Uhm, Frabby? Dechan Fraser was never the Bounty Hunter. Michi Noketsuna was, with Dechan riding shotgun. I took out the line you put in there. Just letting you know. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 16:20, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :D'oh! Thanks for clearing this up. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 18:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Sick ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Hey, can you handle some of the emergent issues? I'd appreciate it. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 12:06, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Get well soon! [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 15:11, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Thanks, man. I'm back now. Came down with a fever right when I was preparing for my family to leave for overseas and I had to take command of my unit for a few weeks. Got my new CO in last Friday, might be catching up on delayed work this next week and should be home well before 9pm most nights, so will be on here more often. Thanks for looking out for my talk page. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 21:02, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::Glad to see you're back! :) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 21:18, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Notable pilots: Possible answer ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Please review: [[BattleTechWiki_talk:Project_BattleMechs#Notable_Pilots_Sample_page]]. Thanks!--[[User:Mbear|Mbear]] 14:17, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Creating category for German & UK Publications of Battletech ==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby, i know this maybe odd suggestion. Is there any thought to creating a for listings for UK & German publications? It maybe give distinction for readers using Sarna.net. I wanted ask you since your one leading folks on internation publications for Battletech on Sarna from what i've read. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 23:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :I don't see any reason why this should not be done. The difficult question is: What makes a German publication? I could not be bothered to list each and every product that FanPro translated into German, and would restrict the list to original foreign-language products. The problem is that there should be no original foreign-language products in the first place, but a small handful do exist. The only truly original foreign-language products I know (besides the German-only novels) are [[Ronin!]] and [[Die Welt des 31. Jahrhunderts]]; then there are compilations like the [[Atlas der Inneren Sphäre]] or Mächte der Inneren Sphäre (article not yet written). I have treated these like any other apocryphal (official but not canonical) product and added them to the [[List of BattleTech products]] accordingly.
| |
| − | :[[FanPro]] did far more than simply translate material - they frequently added new content in the process and many scenario books have errata or slight expansions. I have treated such cases through mentioning these official-but-not-canonical expansions in a separate section on the original article for the product in question (see [[Solaris VII: The Game World#Arena-Planet Solaris VII]] or [[Technical Readout: 3026#Notes]] for examples - and I just saw that I need to expand the Hardware-Handbuch 3031 entry a fair bit...).
| |
| − | :I am not aware of any (original) UK publications except those by the MFUK, and they are arguably not even official. So not worth a list of their own imho, except perhaps as part of the [[MFUK]] article. And that has yet to be written by someone who actually knows something about the MFUK (i.e., not me). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 06:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::My intentions is to bring to note of some products that were translated to german may be so changed that they run into ''official-but-not-canonical expansions'' problem. With so many people adding things from across the world, i'm concern that they maybe adding things to existing articles that maybe from such alter sources. There was discussion regarding the Jade Falcon's Khan Irregulars which were known by differient name in the German translations. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 11:02, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::It is certainly worthwile, even desireable, to ferret out such alterations/expansions. For canonicity purposes on this wiki, however, keep in mind that German translations are not Canon - only the (original) english text meets the criteria. Because of this, I tend to work exclusively from original english sources and only buy translated German items when I can get them very cheap on Ebay.. It is sometimes fun to compare them with the originals. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 11:17, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Creating single entries for larger merc formations==
| |
| − | Hy, I created all larger merc formation at brigade level with singel entries, because all regiments have a colorful history. Only article isn't enough to cover all of the facts. All sourcebooks break the formations down at regimental level. I think this is best suited.
| |
| − | The Kell Hounds (2 regiments), Blue Star Irregulars (2 regiments) and all other large formation should cover. I think I make a good job with the coverage of these units. Ask the other admin about their opinions and let me know it. The former articles were insufficient. [[User:Neuling|Neuling]] 12:17, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Block==
| |
| − | Hy Frabby please block EmmaWatson..., thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 15:57, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Zapp! :) Also deleted the picture uploads. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 15:59, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Thanks, we dont need this ;).--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 15:59, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | Hy Frabby please block [[User:Lester984016|Lester984016]], he makes some spame links, and violance, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 22:41, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Zapp! [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 22:57, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::Wow, that was nasty Spambot. I wish there was better way to prevent from that from happening. I'd be angry as heck if that gotten to the some of the main articles.-- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 11:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Hy Frabby, please block User [[Lambert386619]], he added a Spamlink to external site, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 11:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Done. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 11:30, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Hy Frabby, please block [[User:ArchiHagan3]], he added a Spamlink to external site, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 12:24, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Redirecting tips ==
| |
| − | Thanks a ton!!! That's really useful to know, there are a few things I'm planning to write that would involve redirects. [[User:Porty1119|Porty1119]]
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Question Regarding ==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby, question: I was going write up something based on the Jihad - a Soldier's Tale. Are you working up to write that up? I don't want take away if you have this in the works. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 22:10, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :No, not really. I was just browsing the thread when I came across the [[Vrikk]] and decided that I should write this article before I forgot about it again, especially as there was so little information that it would be quick to write. I planned to create the article for [[Jihad - a Soldier's Tale]] eventually because it's fully canonical, but haven't really started so go right ahead. Btw when writing, keep in mind that the protagonist was revealed as the man who became Spectre Precentor [[Berith]]. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 10:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Thats why i wanted to write up the article regarding the story. I wrote up the Berith and its would be easier to have the story on hand. Since it was free, i was going to put it on a word file and upload it to the site later. Part of me wishes they had written more in his diary/journal. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 11:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::Pretty much the same plan I had. :) Though I strongly recommend that you don't simply copy the thread without asking, both as a matter of courtesy and because it is a copyrighted work even when freely available on the net. I have a lot of freebie downloads from CBT.com on my hard disk that I haven't uploaded to Sarna (yet), such as the Lawyers, Guns & Money scenario. As far as I understood NicJansma, file upload on the wiki should only be done for pictures that are needed for articles. Files for download should go to the download section. Therefore I plan to contact him about revamping the download section eventually, and and adding a lot of stuff like [[Objective Raids: 3067]], the LinkNet files, some free download stuff, and also Jihad - a Soldier's Tale. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 14:18, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::Thats fine. I was going to ask Rome about that. I was under the impression that articles/informationt hat was posted freely on the Forums were consister open. I do feel it would be best to ask before i did that. Please let me know what NicJansma says about the free canon Battletech files/stories. For the moment the Jihad - A Soldier's story is just referring article with link to forums. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 15:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Deletion of PDF Files==
| |
| − | Hi Frab, looks like Nicjansma has gone to delete some files we were using. I realize this is his site. This mass deletion making me think twice working on a site like this. Example, i had uploaded [[Republic of the Sphere]] maps which were PDF forms since that all existed as. He outright deleted them saying they were unused. I know he has to make space, but still unnerves me were loosing stuff we worked on. Has he setup policy on how is going to be? No PDFs, no pictures unless it somehow link already to the article? I'm not sure how to find the CDN files if wherever their being stored. Please forgive me i'm fairly upset at the moment. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 12:45, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | :No Panic. Everything was saved, nothing was deleted permanently. What I don't understand is what purpose non-image files serve in article links? Stuff like documents for download really belong into the download section, and the wiki should have an article ''about'' this file if it is noteworthy enough. Case in point: [[Objective Raids: 3067]] is a BTW article; the actual file for download now sits in the download section where most people would go look for it anyways, plus a link to the download can easily be included into the article. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 19:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Some of the PDFs were free maps produced by WizKids and CGL, shows the Republic of Sphere. Some of the files are dossiers, which show case character not yet profiled by CGL. They have information of mercenary, splinter groups, and so forth. They are important. Recently they came out with PDF of LinkNet and other online content from the old WizKids website. They are considered Canon by CGL. Some of the articles here, refer to them. Which why i'm having slight panic when Nic started whole saling removing them. My concern now with articles is wiki-links that were connected to them. Nic restored the maps of the Republic of the Sphere, however there others may have linked to the articles. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 19:42, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==BattleCorps PDFs==
| |
| − | Hy, Frabby at first falls the published BattleCorps Pdfs ([[BattleTech: Hawke's Horde]])...etc. under a moratorium, and second is it usefull i create a (book, electronic book article, from this publications), I have all pdfs on start , or we put the content summary with the pdf cover image to your at last new created pag.Thanks--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 22:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Good question. Now that you ask, I think they ''do'' fall under the [[Policy:Moratorium]]. However, the Unit Digests as well as their entries in the summary article [[BattleCorps Unit Digests]] are so short that I don't think the Moratorium policy is applicable.
| |
| − | :Another, separate, question is what to do with the [[BattleTech: Hawke's Horde]] article. I think it should be removed now that we have the summary article; "full" articles about short BattleCorps Exclusives would effectively copy the entire content to Sarna and put us dangerously close to copyright infringement, imho. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 11:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Hi, Doneve: just wanted to weigh in and indicate agreement with Frabby on what he said regarding summaries for these BattleCorps Exclusives falling under the [[BattleCorps Unit Digests]] article. And, while I agree with him, too, that the article you wrote should be deleted and added to the Digests article, I want to say I was very impressed with the quality of the article you wrote. While not much ''can'' be said about such a small product, I appreciated your notes section, especially since I know English is a second language for you. Thanks for hitting the smaller products.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 19:34, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::Hy Rev, thanks for your interest, the question is, can i put the cover images and the content summary, with links on the [[BattleCorps Unit Digests]] page, like the [[BattleTechnology]] article, i have other BattleCorps stuff like that, i hope so, and i think it is a good idea, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 19:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::I'm not sure of the value of adding the cover images. They'll identical, except for the title. An example one (maybe for each of the three types of reports)?--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 10:24, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::Agree with Rev - there's not much of a cover image page there, not enough to warrant one for each publication anyways. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 14:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::: Ok guys, here is a example [[User:Doneve/Example]], please take a look on it, when it came some response, i talk to Frabby or Rev to delete the page.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 15:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::::I've gotta admit, Frabby: I'm kinda partial to Doneve's example. The images are still iffy to me (too similar to warrant expectations that a writer should incorporate them into each entry), but I wouldn't complain if they did. What I do prefer is linking all Unit Digests together, in the reporting style he's provided (i.e., allows for links to character and unit articles). I tend towards lumping like articles (Unit Digests) together as report types, rather than just one article on all BattleCorps Exclusives. I wouldn't have the same Contents note for each entry, though. (Just sharing my opinion...not meaning to push you off the path you started, if you're preferential to it.)--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 16:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::::Hy Revanche, thanks for your quick response, i wait of response from Frabby what he thinking about of it, but i can agree with the reasen to linking all Digests together.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 16:54, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::::::I am not totally opposed to Doneve's vision. It's just that I can foresee some problems with his approach: The page is going to be very long, and most of its content is going to be very repetitive. Add to this that you can't really expect many crosslinks, because the digests specifically target minor units/stables and the ship reports are extremely narrow in their scope. Finally, regarding pictures, I agree that maybe one sample cover for each type is okay, but like Rev I think including each and every cover is pointless as they all look alike. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 19:06, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::::::Hy Frabby, your permission the article becomes very long, what is with the [[BattleTechnology]] page, she is very very long!!--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 19:27, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::::::::There's only a limited number of BattleTechnology issues that were produced. But we don't know how many unit digests, ship profiles and stable reports we're going to see.
| |
| − | :::::::::::For the time being I'd suggest to use Doneve's more complete writeup for the summary article, but without cover images (or at least, no more than one sample for each type of report). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 19:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::::::::How about this idea: modify what currently exists for the 405th at [[BattleCorps Unit Digests]]? It's not as 'clean' as Doneve's example, but it is compact, adding only 3 more lines (counting the space). Also, Frabby, how do you feel breaking them out into like articles? The first section of each article would describe the intent of the series (stables, units, ships), with an image of the first product, and then each additional section would focus on the specific products, in the same modified style you established.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 22:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::::::::::Like I said, I'm not totally opposed to your (or Doneve's) editing. The one thing that's important to me is that we don't create a pointless mess of substandard articles, and with so little content, the digests therefore need to go into one summary article imho. So go right ahead. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 22:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::::::::::I'll wait to see how Doneve leans: the full-scale sections (as from his example page, but with one image) or mine (the 405th example).--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 22:50, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::::::::::Ok Frabby, what do you think about this, at this time, the number of published Unit Digests...etc, is not so much, we put only one Image from some sample type, and used my Content example.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 22:53, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | That's what I tried to say. :) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 23:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | : Okidoky, at next i upload the Stable image and content to it, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 23:04, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Deletion==
| |
| − | Hy Frabby, please can you delte my [[User:Doneve/Example]] page, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 00:05, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Battles of Hesperus ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Frabby - Excellent work. I was actually looking at those myself, but couldn't find info on many of the earlier ones. I grant you the [[File:SubAdd.jpg|Substantial Addition Award, 1st ribbon]]. Congrats. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 21:52, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Why, thank you! Looking over the section again, there's certainly room for improvements, especially with the recent BattleCorps scenarios and ship profile published for the 6th/7th/8th battle, adding some detail to the naval side of things there. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 23:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Upload Pic Problem==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby, sorry to bother you. Neuling has upload a large quanity of pictures of Project Phoenix reseen 'Mechs. The problems, he did it little sloppily, i'm currently fixing info of these pictures, which has almost nothing but template saying fair use, that about it. Name of the pictures are messed up, he must been typing mighty fast, has cRd.8 cRusadeR, for exmaple. Can you fix these names? or whom could move them so the names would be fixed? -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 13:57, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :I noted the weird spelling on the uploads and sent him a message; it seems he stopped randomly mixing uppercase/lowercase letters in the filenames after that. As for fixing the problem, I shall see if I can simply move them. The problem with pictures on the wiki front is that nothing is ever completely deleted, any change (even a deletion) just stacks up data detailing the change. Hopefully moving pictures doesn't simply duplicate them in the database. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 15:29, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::I see, well i would have moved them to fix their names. The majority of these pictures were new to Sarna.net when uploaded. I can't say that i wasn't upset he was doing it and doing so neglectifully. I was worried about copyright issues that crop up. Thanks for my your help with this, i don't believe he would listen to me if had said something to him. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 13:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::Well I ''did'' move them. Though I'm not happy with the case-sensitivity of BTW, nor with the naming scheme adopted for the files now (first letter is uppercase, entire rest strictly lowercase). It's not good, but at least it's consistent. Changing all file names beyond that would have been too much hassle, at least for me. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 21:47, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::Thanks for straightening it out, with it being least uniformed at least it will be okay if someone tries to search the file. Thank you alot for helping it out! I'd like to present to you the [[File:DA.jpg|Direction Appreciated Award, 1st ribbon]] -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 11:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Thanks! ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Hey Frabby - Thanks for the awards! Much appreciated! [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 02:29, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Thank you ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | The edit on [[Michael Gilbert]] looks much better than I could have done, thanks [[User:Wookiebear|Wookiebear]] 22:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :My pleasure. It is a most curious situation; I wonder how it happened. Do you and Michael Taylor know each other? [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 23:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Not that I know of, but I know a lot of people by nic-names and aliases due to some of my other hobbies, so maybe, just not as Michael Taylor :) [[User:Wookiebear|Wookiebear]] 19:25, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==News Update Requested==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby, is possible you can include that on 24th of January that Forums came back up? Thanks -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 22:14, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Umm... I think I did. Kinda. See first news item (dated 27 Jan). The new forum, which for all intents and purposes replaces the now-defunct old forum, went live on the 26th I think (maybe it was still the 25th in the US), but not on the 24th. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 23:32, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::hmm, i wonder why that didn't show up. My fault. Sorry to bother you about it. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 23:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Solaris VII Map==
| |
| − | Hy Frabby, please change the File name of my uploaded Davion (arena) Map, it is the Steiner (arena), ;), thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 18:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Done. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 08:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == 2010 Founders Awards==
| |
| − | Hey Frabby! For the last four years, you've been consistent, well spoken and an incredible organizer. You've really helped guide BTW to what it is today -- which, I can say, is a lot more than I ever dreamed it would be. I realize you may not think yourself as such, but you're a great ambassador for BTW. This is why I think you're deserving of two Founders Awards, and I think your fellow community members will agree: the Founder's Consistent Service Award and the Founders Exceptional Ambassador of the Year Award. It's been a pleasure working along side you. [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] 06:11, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[File:F CSA.jpg|Founder's Consistent Service Award]] [[File:F ERYA.jpg|Founder's Exceptional Ambassador of the Year Award]]
| |
| − | :What can I say... Thanks! :) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 08:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Vandal Cop award ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | You were clearly busy today with some of the less creative members of society.
| |
| − | :[[File:VC.jpg|Vandal Cop Award]]<br>
| |
| − | --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 12:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Reply about uploaded images ==
| |
| − | I'm quite appalled that you called the images "inferior" that’s just insulting both to the images and the artist who worked very hard on improving the old Clan emblems. 99% of the Clan images we have here on Sarna.net are of very low quality, and hi-res versions of the originals are extremely hard to find.
| |
| − | | |
| − | If you want to go ahead and search the internet for days on end looking for the one hi-res image of the originals by all means go right ahead, I simply don't have the time for that.
| |
| − | | |
| − | You shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth, because all you’re going to see is the inside of gift horse. Punakettu on Deviant Art saved the wiki a considerable amount of time my recreating the images, lets just use them and be done with it.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Regards,
| |
| − | | |
| − | Jake {{Unsigned|Jake Command Wolf|13:42, 15 February 2011}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | :I stand by what I wrote. I grant you that the images look better than the previous ones. But they are fan creations (unsourced in any case), and technically should be marked as fanon. A wiki, imho, should be about authenticity, not about fancy pictures. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 20:26, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Frabby, on a related note, I'm not sure we're even allowed to display these images. There is no licensing info attached (Jake left legality regarding uploading or using the imagery blank) and the fair use only applies to instances where the item being used (or displayed) are the focus of discussion. Since the linked articles are about canon & official items of interest, the use of the fanon images implies only a tangential relationship (i.e., "Look at these images...they're homages to the subject article."). I'm not sure I want to put Nic at risk of a cease & desist (or stronger) just for non-canon, fancier images.<br>
| |
| − | Are we really getting enough complaints (or even any) from other readers for using canon imagery (which are protected by fair use), to require opening ourselves up to complaints from an artist over the use of his artwork without his permission? --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 20:51, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :To wit, I respect Jake as a contributor to BTW and by no means wanted to belittle his contributions. But he's falling into the same trap that Neuling (?) fell into - grabbing unsourced, unverified stuff from the internet isn't the kind of contributions we need on BTW, though the reasons why this is problematic aren't immediately obvious. I feel my point is an important one, so I pointed it out. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 21:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::This may shock you, as I was a big supporter of fanon articles, but I'm really becoming solidly onboard with making BTW about non-fanon material completely. I think allowing the fanon articles on has lead to the confusion as to what is and is not appropriate. If you're interested in dicussing this further, we can open a top-level discussion. Let me know. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 21:37, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ---
| |
| − | | |
| − | I find all of this rather pointless and mortifying,
| |
| − | | |
| − | Frabby the pictures are authentic, from what I read the artist used the base images and merely improved there appearances, he restored them just like a artist would do to an old piece of art to bring it back to its former glory, its not like he took the Clan Wolf emblem, repainted in pink and replaced the stars with hearts and unicorns.
| |
| − | | |
| − | On a side note I know the artist Punaketta works with MekTek, the company that made a free version of Mechwarrior 4 for free release, given permission Microsoft. His artwork is also used in the studios original game remake of Mechwarrior 2/3/4 called Assault Tech 1.
| |
| − | | |
| − | If this is about permissions I can simply ask Punaketta via Deivant Art if we have his permission to use his emblems on the wiki or not, which I have, he has yet to get back to me, but he hasn't been active on Deviant Art for a while so it may take a bit for him to get back to me.
| |
| − | | |
| − | I'm still in disbelief that we are having a dispute about such a pinprick subject, I mean seriously, his work is fan made but it’s not fanon, its refurbished canon artwork, nothing more nothing less.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Regards,
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[User:Jake Command Wolf| Jake]]
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Update ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | I wanted to let you know I recieved a reply from Punaketta on Deviant Art, he said his artwork is free to use by anyone, I hope that will end the dispute over this.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Regards, [[User: Jake Command Wolf | Jake]]
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Jake, what process would you recommend to decide if a fan-produced piece of art was <u>more</u> appropriate than an official one? In other words, how do we apply your individual process for these two pieces to other pieces that other posters may want to use in substitute for official images?
| |
| − | :Second question: should this extend to other fan-produced works? --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 02:24, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == When you have time.... ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Frabby - Please give [[Talk:Isle of Skye]] when you have some time... as well as its accompanying article. It was an absolute beast to write. But more relevantly, there are some things I'd like to do with respect to redirects that I wanted your advice on. Thanks. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 08:23, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Will be back on this. I'm away over the weekend with sporadic internet access (like always when Herb calls for a CBT chat :( )[[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 16:47, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | I've taken a look... and I'm sufficiently awed to have granted you another Superior Article award. If only all BTW articles were of such quality... [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 22:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Plagarism Concern ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Please see [[Talk:Operation Bulldog]]. Thanks. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 03:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Merge==
| |
| − | Hy Frabby, can you take a look on the new created [[Winfield's Regiment]], i think he merged with [[Winfield's Brigade]].--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 11:19, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Canon Warship List==
| |
| − | Hy Frabby, can you give me a working link or a another linke how i can get the Master WarShip List, the link there you posted on the [[Talk:Canon WarShip Overview]] page bring my only to the CBT forum and i can't found a link to download the Warship list, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 21:10, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :[http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,1791.msg40182.html#msg40182 This post] within the thread links to a download of the most recent version of the list. As the thread continues, a yet newer version may be posted. (The user keeping the list is BlackAce.) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 22:51, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == The Battlecorps ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Frabby, [[The Battle Corps]] article has a tag that indicates it is apocraphyl and points to a nonexistent canonicity section. But the [[BattleCorps]] article indicates the unit is canon. As the resident expert on these two articles, can you please clear this up?[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 23:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Thanks for spotting. The tag on the article says "Apocryphal content" because the Battle Corps is one of those units where much (probably most) of the available information is apocryphal or straight non-canon. There's a huge section about the Corps on the BC site's forum but none of that material is expressly canon; only the bits and pieces from MercUpdate/MercSupp are truly canon. Will write a Canonicity section for the article shortly to make this clear. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 09:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Aha, got it. Thanks, Frabby. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 16:22, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::I think this unit is canon because it exist extensiv information in several publications Let's see:
| |
| − | :Mercanery Supplemental Update p.30
| |
| − | :Jihad Hot Spots Terra p.36 + 74 + 96 + 102
| |
| − | [[User:Neuling|Neuling]] 18:02, 19 March 2011 (UTC).
| |
| − | :::: Agreed. I personally believe the tag should be dropped, or if there is material that should be removed and posted elsewhere, we should do so. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 03:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::Kinda surprised. Do you realize that we have two different yellow tags, one saying "Apocryphal '''article'''" and the other saying "Apocryphal '''content'''"? When you read the tag, it says that "some" (as opposed to all) information in the article comes from apocryphal sources and the Canonicity section explains this in great detail.
| |
| − | :::::The Star Wars Wiki (Wookiepedia) does it a bit differently. They have a pair of tags saying "Warning - apocryphal information begins/ends here". I suggested that for BTW originally but others voted it down because they felt the tags made the article look incomplete and under construction, and were generally off-putting. Perhaps we should re-open that discussion? [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 07:57, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Replacement of the infobox ==
| |
| − | Hi there, it seems that you deleted the faction-infobox. Where can I find the proper replacement? [[User:ROM secrets|ROM secrets]] 23:04, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :D'oh, mistake on my behalf. Fixed now. Thanks for pointing this out. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 08:48, 22 March 2011 (UTC) | |
| − | | |
| − | == Date Error on MUL ==
| |
| − | The MUL's release date was in March. You listed it as February on the front page. [[User:Moonsword|Moonsword]] 12:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Fixed, thanks for spotting. Move on, nothing to see... :) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 13:25, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | == MUL: Battle Values ==
| |
| − | Hi Frabby, i being vague and not so smart didn't realize you posted your own MUL explanation. I've posted the released version of [[Master Unit List: Battle Values]]. Do you think this is a case of me having delete the article since its sort of a duplication, or should they some how be intergrated into one another? -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 23:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :No, they're two different things and should thus have two distinct articles imho. The MUL is a very big project, and the MUL: BV is only one small fraction of the whole, one of many different MUL products. I believe we will see additional similar products, and they should all have their own articles. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 23:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Alright then. By the way, would you mind looking at the article i wrote, see if my explaination wasn't clear? I sometimes end up writting jumpled explainations without realzing it. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 23:45, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Retractable Blade ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Frabby - Please take a look at my edits for [[Retractable Blade]] when you have a chance. I made some addition that I wanted to make sure met current policy. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 03:00, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Looks good, although I admittedly don't know the first thing about this item or its associated rules. What specific parts of the article do you have in mind where policies might be an issue? [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 09:51, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Well, I know we have certain rules regarding what "Game Rules" could be reproduced here and what couldn't, as it would be considered plagiarism. I rarely take on equipment articles, so I wanted someone to look it over. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 15:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Zeta Battalion ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Frabby -- If you could give [[Zeta Battalion]] a look, I'd appreciate it. Thanks! [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 15:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Scenario Question == | + | == Adding Design Programs in Left Menu == |
| − | Hi Frabby, i had question for you. I've added [[4th Assault (Clan Star Adder)]] as a unit profile, using what information i have. I do not have [[BattleCorps Scenarios#Rivers_of_Blood|Rivers of Blood]], the scenario describes the Clan Star Adders sent the elements of the 4th Assault to fight a trinary of the 17th Crimson Guard (Clan Blood Spirit). Is it possible you or someone else could fill in the missing Canon information on it? I have no idea where the Trial accrued and i don't feel good about filling in stuff i don't own. I've add just little to it. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 02:09, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Done. The scenario is about the hydroelectric power generators for the ''Delphyne'' factory on York. I saw that the factory itself is described as a Fire Mandrill facility, but was defended by the Blood Spirits which I thought might be in error. Turns out the ''Delphyne'' is a joint Fire Mandrill/Blood Spirit design so it does make sense after all. I have updated the scenario entry as well as the unit profile for the Star Adder unit. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 20:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==Template Infobox Books==
| + | Do you think is worth adding a direct link the the design softwares? The pages I've been adding: [[:Category:Battletech Design Software]].--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 05:12, 22 March 2021 (EDT) |
| − | Hy Frabby, i notice you don't have a page row in your infobox, any thought.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 00:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Not exactly sure what you mean. If you're referring to the [[Template:InfoBoxProduct]], it does have a line for page count ("Pages", line 7). The older InfoBoxes "book", "novel" and "BattleCorps" should not be used anymore and will be deleted soon. I am still in the process of upgrading all articles to the unified InfoBoxProduct and will have to change/remove references to the older templates from the main page. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 06:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Fanon == | + | == Board Game == |
| | | | |
| − | Dude, I saw your edits, commentary and deletion reviews for that one unregistered poster and I (now) agree with you. Originally, you were opposed to fanon on this site and I'm definitely leaning that way now. People don't come here to read fanon [my unsupported impression]. If I get Nic's nod of approval, would you be with me in opening a discussion on whether or not fanon should be retained?--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 16:06, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
| + | Afternoon, Frabby. IRT [[Board Game]], I'm not sure what to make of this page. It seems to attract the attention of multiple Editors, but...what is it saying? I'm thinking of categorizing it as either Lists or Miscellaneous, but...I just don't get it. Advise, please. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 12:38, 9 May 2021 (EDT) |
| | + | :It's funny that you raise this just now. I've had to take a short wikibreak of sorts and taking that step back made me realize there's a laundry list of admin-level issues on Sarna that needs to be adressed, or at least is becoming a serious problem from my viewpoint. Presentation, project coordination, category structure, article structures, newbie help, you name it. Artifact articles like this one you mentioned are a small facet of one of the major chapters on this wish list. I was going to discuss this with Nic and the active admins shortly and I'm extremely happy to have you back so expect mail shortly (couple of days probably). :) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 13:03, 9 May 2021 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| − | :Let me put it this way: I can see where Nic is coming from when he welcomes fanon and some bits and pieces are quite good. But the overwhelming majority is... superflous at best. And at worst, it is damaging this Wiki's reputation. I'm all for purging Fanon, pending Nic's approval, and I even have a plan: | + | ::Roger that, muh-man. I'll hold off on any action until in receipt of your treatise. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 13:20, 9 May 2021 (EDT) |
| − | **Step 0: Create new Notability policy saying Fanon must be (very) notable to warrant inclusion here (well-known stuff that the BT community knows, such as the LaCasse list, might deserve a mention but Bob Smith's Daishi Overkill variant doesn't).
| |
| − | **Step 1: Announce Fanon purge in x months time, remove Fanon creation templates from front page and Help section
| |
| − | **Step 2: Create an announcement template and tag all Fanon articles accordingly ("All Fanon content will be moved to...")
| |
| − | **Step 3 (after a month or two): Copy all Fanon content over to the BattleTech Fanon Wiki (that somebody else already set up, but which - so far - isn't being used)
| |
| − | **Step 4 (after half a year or so): Delete Fanon content on BTW (mind this will be some 8-10 months after the articles were tagged with a warning in Step 2)
| |
| − | :This should give a smooth transition to a wiki without Fanon content. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 19:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :: *Pulls out a lighter and waves it back and forth* Testify, brother! Testify! (I am 100% behind this.) [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 19:52, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::Very good hot spot, agree agree.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 19:58, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Okay, Step -1: Summon the Nic. I'll get back to you. [[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 23:06, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::I think the wiki has evolved in such a way that hosting fan content here no longer makes sense. In addition, there is now a wiki devoted exclusively to such content. I support removing fanon from BTW. --[[User:Scaletail|Scaletail]] 23:30, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::Though i am reluctant in seeing some of the more polished stuff that clearly marked as fantom, such as [[Objective Raids: 3067]]. I agree sarna should be all-canon content. I'd hope there isn't a backlash. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 01:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::::Distinction note, Wrangler: the <u>article</u> about ''Objective Raids: 3067'' is not fanon; ones such as [[Searchlights for Less]] , [[WillCorps Manufacturing Company]], [[Bandeirante]] and [[Alternate, 4th Succession War History]] most certainly are. Works by fans such as Frabby's example above on the LaCasse list and ''Objective Raids: 3067'' are not hosted here (''per se''), but are notable enough to warrant articles.
| |
| − | :::::::However, we're waiting for Nic's guidance before we pursue too much discussion. I think Frabby has a great plan above, if we do get permission to entertain a divestment of fanon.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 02:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::::Definitely approve, and the process Frabby has outlined gives more than enough warning and notification of what is occurring and where to look. [[User:Cyc|Cyc]] 02:45, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::::: Follow-up : I differentiate between "Fanon" and "Non-canon product" (such as the video games, and the books only published in german). I'm reasonably comfortable leaving the "non-canon products", though maybe we can change how they are presented. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 03:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::::::I'm in general agreement about removing (or moving) the Fanon, though I think we should try to elicit feedback on the main page from others. I'm not sure that http://battletechfanon.wikia.com is the best place to move the Fanon to, considering it was "almost completed" in 2008 and now has 19 articles :) [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] 06:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::::::::Glad to hear that you're not opposed to the proposal Nic - this is your site after all. I have put an invitation to this discussion up on the front page's news section.
| |
| − | ::::::::::Content will only be deleted here only after it was migrated to BT Fanon Wiki. I think we owe that to the contributors. As for the BTFW, I reckon it never quite got off the ground because it wasn't needed; people turned to BTW instead. When we separate the BT Wiki from the BT Fanon Wiki I guess the BTFW will see a surge in content and contributions. Plus, why create a fanon wikia all over again when the groundwork has already been laid by someone... [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 11:03, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::::::::::I've created a dedicated discussion page for this [[Policy Talk:Fanon |here]]. Please indicate your support or non-support for this suggestion there.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 13:26, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Infoboxes == | + | == Brawlers == |
| | | | |
| − | Frabby - I don't know if this is affecting other people, but a whole bunch of things look different to me. The front page has been moved around, and more notable, the infoboxes on the weapon articles look very different. Instead of being a sidebar on the right, its appearing on top, pushing the rest of the article down. Is that just me? Thanks. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 03:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC) | + | Afternoon, Frabby. Would you please take a look at my attempt to update the [[Brawler]] article? I'm specifically asking for a review of the general completeness of the role's description and the (hopefully) fair-use presentation of the ''Alpha Strike'' description. If/when it is acceptable, I'm intending to update/build the remaining unit role articles, including for the ASFs. Thanks. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 15:26, 15 May 2021 (EDT) |
| − | : Hey there, I happened to notice your message. Yesterday I updated the site's CSS in anticipation of allowing "House"-style themes (colors) for the site. If you are noticing specific things off, can you show me the page that you're looking at, and what browser? Then I can investigate further. [[User:Nicjansma|Nicjansma]] 04:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
| + | :Unfortunately I've never played Alpha Strike, never even completely read the AS rulebook. I'm totally in the dark about that game system. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 03:07, 18 June 2021 (EDT) |
| − | ::Actually, I'm afraid I am not much help to anybody on coding issues - I'm woefully clueless in that respect. But seeing how Nic has already seen and dealt with the problem I suppose this is settled now anyways. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 09:19, 28 April 2011 (UTC) | |
| − | ::: Nic - This is ClanWolverine101. The problem (isn't) one article. Its EVERY article that has an infobox. I have a Firefox browser. Now, I can't do anything at all because when I login, the screen goes blank. Please change back whatever you were doing? You can contact me at my account's email addy. [[Special:Contributions/192.80.61.181|192.80.61.181]] 18:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC) | |
| − | ::::(Copied over to Nicjansma's talk page; also emailed him about the problem below. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 22:23, 29 April 2011 (UTC))
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Blocked??? == | + | == Longbow Note == |
| | + | Hey Frabby. In the note you left on the Longbow article, it may be worth mentioning that Ral Partha produced the miniature using the Unseen image, [[Ral_Partha_Catalogs#Ral_Partha_Catalog_1988|in their catalog starting in 1988]], which coincides with the appearances in ''Merc's Handbook'' and ''The Star League''. --[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 11:01, 21 August 2021 (EDT) |
| | + | :That's indeed worth noting. I don't have that catalogue, and didn't know that (I'm really not very much into miniatures). Can you expand the Notes to include this info? [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 11:07, 21 August 2021 (EDT) |
| | + | ::I gave it a shot. Hopefully I got the point across while maintaining the flow.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 11:59, 21 August 2021 (EDT) |
| | + | :::Pretty good, thank you. I take it "sku" is part of the product name? In an ideal world we would have an article link here, but miniatures are the stepchild of Sarna and I am in no position to improve the situation. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 12:16, 21 August 2021 (EDT) |
| | + | ::::SKU stands for Stock Keeping Unit--the manufacturers stock number for the product. It is listed in the catalog article, there just isn't an easy way to directly link to its exact location. Setting individual anchors is a bit of a task.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 12:27, 21 August 2021 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| − | Frabby - Its ClanWolverine101. Whenever I login to my account, the whole screen goes blank. I've tried this on multiple computers, and nothing will pop up. Is it possible I was blocked somehow? I can't even get in to change my settings. Please contact me at my account's email. Thanks. - CW [[Special:Contributions/192.80.61.181|192.80.61.181]] 18:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
| + | ==Four minor points== |
| − | :Neuling seems to have similar problems. Something is obviously amiss. Personally, I can log off and log back on fine, and I don't see any problems on the pages. All infoboxes seem to work fine. Like I wrote above, I've sent an email to Nic. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 22:23, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
| + | :''(Moved from user page to user talk page)'' |
| | + | I can't get the hang of pinging on this wiki, so I came to your page. It's nice to have feedback because my efforts aren't perfect. |
| | + | * Re: AeroSpace Fighter, I've been using the [[Policy:BattleTech Style Guide]] connected to the Manual of Style, which requires CamelCase. I don't think I have a copy of the BattleCorps MOS. |
| | + | * Re: Mad Jumpin Jacks, it was inconsistent within the article so I went with what's at the [[Phoenix (Mercenary Command)]] page the unit name redirects to. I don't read German and I don't know if I have a PDF or doc of the novel to check against so I didn't even try to consult the original. |
| | + | * Re: Hyphen use in co-founder. I've been going with Fowler ("hyphens are regrettable necessities, and to be done without when they reasonably may") due in part to the over(mis)use of hyphens by CGL. I'm using a dictionary aggregator and the Chicago Manual of Style for hyphenation but I'm bound to get a few wrong. |
| | + | * Re: Correcting quotations. I try to consult the original text before correcting quotes but I know I miss some; I'm glad to have my mistakes corrected. I've actually had to correct a few quotes in other articles to match what's in the original product text. |
| | + | It would have been helpful if FASA/FanPro/CGL had at least tried to be consistent in its own products... [[User:Madness Divine|Madness Divine]] ([[User talk:Madness Divine|talk]]) |
| | | | |
| − | == Thank you == | + | ==PseudoTech== |
| | + | Hey Frabby. Saw that you removed Moratorium from [[PseudoTech: Arcade Operations]]. Please note this is ''not'' a Free product. It costs $2.99 in the CGL store and DriveThruRPG.--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 11:59, 7 April 2022 (EDT) |
| | + | :D'oh. Me sloppy. Thanks for pointing out! Changing back. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 12:03, 7 April 2022 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| − | Frabby - Thanks so much to you and Rev for clearing up the login issue. Have an Assistance Appreciated Award on me.
| + | == Some German edition issues == |
| − | [[File:AA.jpg|Assistance Appreciated Award, 1st ribbon]]
| |
| − | [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 13:52, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==Plagiarism==
| + | Frabby. I encountered two issues related to German editions of certain novels. The issues are posted in [[Talk:List of German BattleTech novels]] and [[Talk:Shadows of War]]. Please feel free to share any insights that may help resolve those. Thanks. --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 22:23, 15 June 2022 (EDT) |
| − | Hy Frabby, i note the most contributions of (Autor: BattleTech Muse 3056) are always plagarized material, in the major Inner Sphere factions section, i dont want to remove content, but can we found a way to correct this, you know i am not the fluff writer, i hope any can overwrite, correct this missere, thanks--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 20:40, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==Commando Quarterly Question==
| + | :Just gonna drop this here, as sorta related: [[Im Schatten der Bestie]] had some notes added to the Canonicity section about Mech names and mistranslations. I just moved it down to a Notes section and otherwise left it be, but if you get a chance, please take a look? Thanks!--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 18:01, 17 June 2022 (EDT) |
| − | Hy Frabby, i have some stuffe from [[Commando Quarterly]] (i hope you create a whole article about this, you know i am not the fluff writer), how we can handle this, is it cannon or apocryphal content, i think not fanon, i want to bring up some content from this source, but i want some support in this tricky terrain.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 14:57, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :A year or two ago I downloaded a couple of issues of Commando Quarterly, and I was well impressed with its content and quality. When I asked him, Herb said it wasn't canon; it's even arbitrary if it is official given the Commandos' unclear status, but I reckon it is definitely among the apocryphal sources (not merely Fanon) and I've been meaning to write an article about this online magazine for quite some time.
| |
| − | :The really funny part comes when I create articles about German fan-made magazines... I got a couple on Ebay. Even under the revised Fanon policy (and I think it's coming), articles ''about'' these sources are fine. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 15:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Ok, this helps, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 19:43, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==Creature Infobox== | + | == Intermedia X-Pulse Laser == |
| − | Hy Frabby, you fix the Creature Infobox, when i added a species image, ok it is shown in it, but i found after the save a broken infobox, take a look on the [[Ghost Bear (species)]] page, thanks. --[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 00:10, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :The InfoBox doesn't look broken to me - can you specify the problem? [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 08:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::The horizontal closing line in the top of the infobox, i don't see it.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 09:14, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::Ah, now I see what you mean. Problem is, this is the same for all new infoboxes we have (and I think it was always like this). Only, on most of them you don't see it because very few images are pure white, most have a dark background. The frame is there on the (old-style) BattleMech infoboxes though so it is possible to have hone. I have no idea how to arrange a frame atop the image, perhaps ask Nic or Mbear? [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 20:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::Ok, i talk to Mbear, and copy our discussion, to his talk page, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 21:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ''Mbear's response''
| |
| − | ::::It looks like the top border of the infobox is missing. To confirm or disprove Frabby's theory, I substituted an award image for the ghost bear image and saw the same problem. The borders to either side of the image appeared, but the top didn't. Still investigating.--[[User:Mbear|Mbear]] 11:05, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::The creature infobox is using the '''infoBoxNew''' CSS class, while the battlemech infobox is using the '''infobox''' CSS class. '''infoBoxNew''' has explicitly set the border-top property to 0px, which makes it disappear. When I changed the creature infobox to use '''infobox''' the border appeared. (It was in the wrong color, but it was progress.) So it looks like the '''infoBoxNew''' class needs to be updated to remove the 0px top border. I don't know what infobox templates are using that class however, so I haven't made the change or requested it.--[[User:Mbear|Mbear]] 11:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==Apocryphal Question==
| + | I just saw that you reverted [[Intermedia X-Pulse Laser]] from where I had marked it for deletion. I am rather confused: it is one among a pile of similar redirects that used to point to Fanon, has nothing linking to it, and I can't see why it would need to stay?--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 08:22, 21 June 2022 (EDT) |
| − | [[File:AA BattleTech Box.jpg|140px|right]] | + | :I did? Damn. Presumably another case of me hitting the stupid "rollback" button when I was really only trying to scroll down the recent changes on my not-so-smart phone. I hate that button! And this time I didn't even realize I had hit it. Re-deleted. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 12:58, 21 June 2022 (EDT) |
| − | Hy Frabby, please tell me if this (''uploaded image of japanese BattleTech'' i put it on your talk page, please delete it if you give me the answer) falls in the apocryphal category, i thinks so, i have some 'mech images in colour from it, and want to put it to sarna, is this japanese version of battletech, a good indicator to the Unseen 'mechs, if is my question unclear, please tell me in german back, thanks.[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 00:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)--00:04, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
| + | ::I have never tried to use this site on anything smaller than an iPad. Somebody rolled my userpage back a couple months, once. :D Thanks for fixing.--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 13:00, 21 June 2022 (EDT) |
| − | :Come to think of it, you're right: Foreign-language-editions of BattleTech are non-canonical according to Herb (i.e. apocryphal), and so would be the (altered) images of the Japanese edition. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 04:51, 19 May 2011 (UTC) | |
| | | | |
| − | ==Spam Bot spotted== | + | == Astronomical Features == |
| − | Hello Frabby, we had multiple a spam bots attack us, by the names of [[User:Sunkaceamar]], [[User: Cosilksara]] [[User:Cynonabnie]] produced a article for some movie. I've marked the [[Downloading Aadukalam film]] for deletion. Can you or someone band this thing please? Thanks - [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 02:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Revanche was quicker that I on this case. :) Generally, please don't bother to edit, blank or deletion-mark these pages - the Admins will spot them quickly and deal with them with extreme prejudice. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 09:27, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :: Please block User:Tedextplanyl, new spam bot attack, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 18:27, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::Another burst of spam bots[[User:Cyc|Cyc]] 06:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | other spam bots:
| |
| − | :[[Ovnidakid]]
| |
| − | :[[Arisatspon]]
| |
| − | :[[Zeifreesnewscar]]
| |
| − | :[[Livecasino]]
| |
| − | [[User:Neuling|Neuling]] 06:36, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::Zzzappp! :-) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 09:25, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ==MechWarrior PC Game== | |
| − | Hi Frabby, i noticed that you uploaded image of a Japanese version of the game. With the Victor Music style art on the cover (Shadow Hawk IIC), do you know any details about that game? Were the images of the 'Mechs changed to Victor's versions? -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 03:54, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :I found the pic somewhere on the internet (Ebay I think), but I never owned the japanese edition myself, nor played it. Anything I wrote about it was information taken from other online sources. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 16:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Thank you for answering my question. I'll try find out more. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] 01:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==Fanon, Essays and Rules==
| + | Frabby, you raised a [[Category talk:Astronomical Features|point]] about the definition of [[:Category:Astronomical Features]] back in 2020. I know that idea may have grown dormant since then, but can you elabaorate (in [[Category talk:Astronomical Features]]) on the issues you see/recall from then and whether they still need attention now? --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 00:03, 5 July 2022 (EDT) |
| − | Hey Frabby, before you hash out too too much ironing out definitions of Fanon feel free to join Revanche and I [[Talk:Revanche/Policy:Essays|here]]. I would love to hear your thoughts on what we have been working out ourselves. -- [[User:LRichardson|LRichardson]] 20:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
| + | :Thanks for the ping. I’ve replied over on the discussion page. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 12:18, 5 July 2022 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| − | ==New Spam== | + | == Japanese Editions == |
| − | Hy Frabby, please kick out [[LidaDeleon9]], new spamer in work.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 00:14, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Please blocke user: HazelHurst5 [[User:Neuling|Neuling]] 18:03, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==BattleCorps Storys==
| + | I seem to recall you collect foreign editions. I have done more detective work: [[Category_talk:Japanese_Editions]] --[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 13:25, 7 July 2022 (EDT) |
| − | Hy Frabby, i want to create a page, where all at this time published BattleCorps Storys listed by name and author, i know the page have some red links, and as second can we create a BattleCorps products page like the products page, or can we integrate this in the existing product page, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 20:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :I think what you are looking for already exists, as [[:Category:BattleCorps publications]]. :-) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 00:13, 16 June 2011 (UTC) | |
| − | ::Ups, thanks.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 08:21, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==German book covers== | + | == ä == |
| − | Hy again, need the uploaded images a Apocryphal tag?--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 20:39, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Phew - good question. I'd say no, but that's just gut feeling. It could be argued they should, because the books are apocryphal. Then again, a book cover as such is very much an OOC thing and not in-universe information (most German book covers have nothing at all to do with the books' content...). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 07:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::Thanks for answer, i notice some of the german covers are a various mix of the american covers, i want to leave a note to the uploaded covers.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 08:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==Spam==
| + | [[Glenmora (Individual Trutzburg-class äDropShip)]]--[[User:Talvin|Talvin]] ([[User talk:Talvin|talk]]) 08:31, 11 July 2022 (EDT) |
| − | Please Block user Dedicatedhosting. The user created spam. Tnx [[User:Neuling|Neuling]] 20:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
| + | :Oops. Fixed. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 16:35, 11 July 2022 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| − | == Essay discussion == | + | == 25th Anniversary Introductory Box Set and BattleTech Einsteigerbox == |
| | | | |
| − | I've been giving the role of essays some thought the last few weeks and I think I've come up with a solution to my issues with them. I've put it [[Talk:Revanche/Policy:Essays#Crisis_of_Conscience|here]] and would appreciate your perspective. Thanks. --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 14:34, 7 July 2011 (UTC) | + | Hello Frabby. I saw your removal of the German edition information from [[25th Anniversary Introductory Box Set]] and the note on the edit. I am curious to get your vantage point on this. While the 2012 ''BattleTech Einsteigerbox'' did not adopt a German version of the title, it does appears that its cover and the components are a port over of those in the 25th Anniversary Introductory Box Set, using the component list from [https://web.archive.org/web/20160813065958/http://www.ulisses-spiele.de/sortiment/tabletop/battletech/produkte/36/battletech-einsteigerbox/ the archived product page from Ulisses-Spiele].) Some of the contained booklets have page counts off by four, but the descriptions of the maps and the 'Mechs, including the premium 'Mechs, seem to align. Even in the lower right hand corner of the cover [[:File:BattleTech Einsteigerbox-cover.jpg]] there is a note that reads '25 jahriges jubilaum kampfkollosse des 4 jahrtausends' (trans. 25th anniversary of the battle colossi of the 4th millennium) so it also seems to be acknowledging the 25th anniversary of BattleTech. It would seem proper to classify this as a German version of the ''25th Anniversary Introductory Box Set'' even though the title is vastly different. Is there something that I am missing or overlooking (whether in terms of interpretation or historical context)? An error on my part is quite possible, especially as German is not a language I am fluent in. I would be curious to get a proper understanding one way or the other. --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 19:47, 9 January 2023 (EST) |
| | + | :Need to research this a little more. The Anniversary Box and subsequent Introduction Box are very similar, that makes it difficult to decide which (if indeed any particular one) of them the German box is based on. It can't really be both though. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 11:51, 14 January 2023 (EST) |
| | + | ::One thing to note is that there are (at least) two different versions of the ''BattleTech Einsteigerbox''. One released in 2012. And one released in 2014. Ulisses-Spielle calls the latter ''BattleTech Einsteigerbox (Neuauflage)''. See [https://web.archive.org/web/20160813065958/http://www.ulisses-spiele.de/sortiment/tabletop/battletech/produkte/36/battletech-einsteigerbox/ BattleTech Einsteigerbox] and [https://web.archive.org/web/20140910183509/http://www.ulisses-spiele.de/produkte/954/battletech-einsteigerbox-neuauflage/ BattleTech Einsteigerbox (Neuauflage)] for a comparison. In fact at the bottom of the web-listing for the older one is a link to the entry for the newer one. --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 12:59, 14 January 2023 (EST) |
| | + | After looking into this I fully agree with you and have re-inserted the German edition parts into the 25th Anniversary Box article. Thanks for calling me out on this mistake. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 05:55, 19 January 2023 (EST) |
| | + | :Thanks for the update and the independent confirmation. It is definitely good to have another set of eyes to help confirm or correct. --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 19:20, 20 January 2023 (EST) |
| | | | |
| − | ==IS Atlas content integration== | + | ==Disambig (cont.)== |
| − | Hy Frabby, hmm i think the question make some problemes with the policy and other thinks, but i hope you can help me and you like the idea. I want to contact [[Chris Wheeler]], how we can move some planetary description content from [[http://isatlas.teamspam.net]] by her permission, and embeded that in sarna.net, with cannonical references, i know there is a lak of some source infos on ''IS Atlas'' and it is a meta-source, i want to make the meta-source content to a cannonical. It is a crazy idea by myself, what you are thinking about this, and i hope the ball rolls.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 20:08, 7 July 2011
| + | Hi Frabby, I'm not sure if you read my last reply in my talk page's Disambig discussion. Have you given any more thought to matter? --[[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 09:08, 22 September 2023 (EDT) |
| − | :Chris Wheeler is "Chinless" on the CBT forum. However, taking information from the IS Atlas is not a good idea because any and all planetary information there is taken straight out of a sourcebook, i.e. directly plagiarized copyrighted material, mostly from the old housebooks and the MechWarrior RPG. It wasn't written by the IS Atlas team. This is apparently tolerated by CGL but here on BTW it would cause us no end of legal headaches - we cannot use these texts for Sarna.net. | + | :Just checking in. As of this moment we are at 1,252 disambig pages and still climbing. I've finished going through all Clan characters and bloodnames currently in the database and have moved on to systems. Deadfire has helped me eliminate several hundred "structural" redirects to improve the search and autocomplete functions. Continuing to add disambig/seeother notes on non-Clan pages as previously discussed. Do you feel things are working and progressing to your satisfaction? [[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 07:23, 9 November 2023 (EST) |
| − | :Mind that I do like the idea of taking a more informative and descriptive approach to systems here, but we'll have to write the texts ourselves (plus provide the citations). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 07:59, 8 July 2011 (UTC) | + | ::You're putting much more work into this than I ever did, honestly. I'm totally fine with it. In individual cases I might disagree regarding the disambig/seeother tag at the page header but if and when I run across something and actually find the time to lean into it, I'll ping you. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 07:52, 9 November 2023 (EST) |
| | + | :::Appreciate it. If you feel the wording of the tag can be improved, of course please make whatever adjustments you feel is appropriate. Sometimes it's not always clear and I'm just doing a quick scan of the article for key words to put in. [[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 08:06, 9 November 2023 (EST) |
| | + | ::Following up on something. Going through the DropShips and WarShips looking for same-named ships, I didn't realize just how many ships were needlessly disambiguated. I didn't count but there's maybe 100? My feelings on this have changed since you first mentioned it last August. Some of them make sense and understandable to leave as is, but if given the opportunity one day I'd be happy to move 90% of them back to their appropriate, simplified links, along with text replacements to rid the wiki of redirects that we don't need, decluttering the search function a little. [[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 01:07, 4 March 2024 (EST) |
| | + | :Oh, you're really preaching to the choir here. Apparently, someone got the notion that all ship names should be disambiguated to "name (class, type)". That wasn't my idea and I never liked it. You are very welcome to purge unneccessary redirects and disambiguations! A word of caution though, there are some edge cases where a ship was renamed and one of its earlier names may be a redirect that requires disambiguation (we do try to track previous names by redirecting these names to the vessel's latest established name). [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 01:37, 4 March 2024 (EST) |
| | + | ::When the time comes, I'll be thorough during my checks. :) [[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 02:21, 4 March 2024 (EST) |
