User talk:BobTheZombie
Proofreading
Feel free to add any pages you want proofread or cleaned up to the bottom of this list and I will go through and clean them up.
- 1st Shin Legion
- Tikonov Guards
- 2nd Tikonov Guards
- 1st Tikonov Guards
- 3rd Tikonov Guards
- Spidermech
- Lucien Davion
- Huntress (BattleMech)
- History
Welcome
For your consideration - Epsilon Regiment (Wolf's Dragoons)
BTZ - Epsilon Regiment (Wolf's Dragoons) has been re-written. I want you to know i accepted your critique of my Beta Regiment article (posted back in 2013), to heart. As such, this article is about 40 percent shorter, where i trimmed and summarized a lot of redundant material. I feel the end product is superior, and hope others will find it so. At some point, i will go back and perform the needed revisions to Beta Regiment and the other Dragoon articles. But please give Epsilon a look and let me know. Thank you. ClanWolverine101 (talk) 12:59, 16 April 2016 (PDT)
Clan Smoke Jaguar Minor Characters
I noticed your comment that you think the article needs a lot of work. I spent a lot of time on that page and am wondering what you think is wrong with it? Dark Jaguar (talk) 10:26, 29 May 2016 (PDT)
- I didn't say there was a lot wrong with it, I just thought I saw something grammatical near the end that could be fixed so I wanted to check back on it later. Perhaps it was nothing. I put that tag (and the comment that I "will come back and work on") when I see something to possibly proofread later. Sorry for the confusion. -BobTheZombie (talk) 10:54, 29 May 2016 (PDT)
- Ok, its just normally I've seen that tag used when the page is so bad it requires a complete rewrite! Dark Jaguar (talk) 11:18, 29 May 2016 (PDT)
- The way I use it, it can range from "Needs to be proofread because I found a couple things and didn't have the time" to "Oh no this is very bad". Yours was obviously the former; don't worry, you're doing great :) It's awesome to see you around again and it's great to be back. -BobTheZombie (talk) 11:37, 29 May 2016 (PDT)
- The template actually generates a message at the top of the page that says "more detail is available on the article talk page" - it presumes that if the reason for the tag isn't obvious, then information will be in the talk page explaining what the issue is. To avoid the risk of confusion (or, in all honesty, feelings getting hurt unintentionally) I'd recommend making use of the talk page just to flag up why the tag has gone on the main article page - that way it'll be a lot easier to see if someone means "this article is terrible and needs to be rewritten" rather than "the grammar in paragraph 57 of 100 needs a bit of tweaking". BrokenMnemonic (talk) 02:54, 1 June 2016 (PDT)
- Yeah that's good thinking; I always try to explain in my edit summary what I intended with it, namely the "will come back and work on", which just means grammar stuff. For bigger formatting/rewriting I usually put something else in the summary or <-- --> comment it in the article what needs to be addressed. I intend to go through all the {cleanup} tagged pages and proofread all of them, but that'll take a long time...
- P.S. I'm back sooner than expected :) -BobTheZombie (talk) 19:15, 1 June 2016 (PDT)
- The template actually generates a message at the top of the page that says "more detail is available on the article talk page" - it presumes that if the reason for the tag isn't obvious, then information will be in the talk page explaining what the issue is. To avoid the risk of confusion (or, in all honesty, feelings getting hurt unintentionally) I'd recommend making use of the talk page just to flag up why the tag has gone on the main article page - that way it'll be a lot easier to see if someone means "this article is terrible and needs to be rewritten" rather than "the grammar in paragraph 57 of 100 needs a bit of tweaking". BrokenMnemonic (talk) 02:54, 1 June 2016 (PDT)
- The way I use it, it can range from "Needs to be proofread because I found a couple things and didn't have the time" to "Oh no this is very bad". Yours was obviously the former; don't worry, you're doing great :) It's awesome to see you around again and it's great to be back. -BobTheZombie (talk) 11:37, 29 May 2016 (PDT)
- Ok, its just normally I've seen that tag used when the page is so bad it requires a complete rewrite! Dark Jaguar (talk) 11:18, 29 May 2016 (PDT)
Blackjack
Hi Bob,
I'm doing my usual morning poke around, and I noticed your amendment to the Blackjack article base don the dev-level errata issued. When you're updating an article based on errata or ATW comments from the CGL forum, can you make sure to quote the forum text in either the notes page of the article or on the article talk page, please? The CGL forums have been wiped at least twice, so if we don't keep a copy of the text here and it happens again, no-one will be able to substantiate the amendment, and it could lead to us being accused of writing fanon again.BrokenMnemonic (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2016 (PDT)
- Oops, I was rushed last night - it's been updated. -BobTheZombie (talk) 09:20, 2 June 2016 (PDT)
Hi
Hi Bob, hope all is well with you. Great to see you back on sarna, i read your talk on Dark Jaguar's talk page, you need work for sarna , i found this awesom post from Mendrugo on the CBT forum (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,25780.0.html), then you have a lot to data mine and add update needed templates :), cheers.--Doneve (talk) 09:01, 4 June 2016 (PDT)
- I read your response on my talk page, if you want to help out, you can involve in the Planet Overhaul project and help to update nearby system tables, here is the spread sheet link we are working from http://www.mediafire.com/view/p9d1q19qd2av791/distances.xls, if you have questions about the sheet, etc. talk to me or BrokenMnemonic, cheers.--Doneve (talk) 12:11, 6 June 2016 (PDT)
Grey Keshik
Spotted your request to flesh out the Sub-Stub, hopefully it looks a little better now. Dark Jaguar (talk) 10:37, 7 June 2016 (PDT)