Difference between revisions of "User talk:ClanWolverine101"
Sarna News
(→First Major Project of 2013 - Rewritten: 4th Skye Rangers: new section) |
|||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
"So CW - What have you been up to these last few weeks?" | "So CW - What have you been up to these last few weeks?" | ||
| + | |||
I give you [[4th Skye Rangers]]. | I give you [[4th Skye Rangers]]. | ||
| + | |||
There are a bunch of reasons why I took this on. One was because I was always interested in these guys, who were the "villains" in two novels (Heir to the Dragon and the Dying Time), and only succeeded in "freeing" Skye with their own disbandment. Such a curious history! | There are a bunch of reasons why I took this on. One was because I was always interested in these guys, who were the "villains" in two novels (Heir to the Dragon and the Dying Time), and only succeeded in "freeing" Skye with their own disbandment. Such a curious history! | ||
| + | |||
The next was to show why I use the Update Needed tags the way I do. When i put one up, I don't usually mean to put one sentence from one particular publication. I want to put the whole thing in context. Since I found many unused references to the Fourth Skye, I decided to use them. | The next was to show why I use the Update Needed tags the way I do. When i put one up, I don't usually mean to put one sentence from one particular publication. I want to put the whole thing in context. Since I found many unused references to the Fourth Skye, I decided to use them. | ||
| + | |||
Another reason (and its bothered me awhile) was the whole "Lyran Rangers" controversy. At one point, some well intentioned individual named the article the Lyran Rangers, in the context that the Fourth Skye were sort of the pre-Lyran Rangers of the Dark Age era. This was somewhat understandable based on the ''Storm Hammers MW:DA Dossier'', but was ultimately refuted in ''[[Field Manual: 3085]]''. It also bothered me that a fairly famous unit was being reduced to a "Dark Age pre-unit". I address this issue in the context of the article. These are different though related units, and I deal with that. | Another reason (and its bothered me awhile) was the whole "Lyran Rangers" controversy. At one point, some well intentioned individual named the article the Lyran Rangers, in the context that the Fourth Skye were sort of the pre-Lyran Rangers of the Dark Age era. This was somewhat understandable based on the ''Storm Hammers MW:DA Dossier'', but was ultimately refuted in ''[[Field Manual: 3085]]''. It also bothered me that a fairly famous unit was being reduced to a "Dark Age pre-unit". I address this issue in the context of the article. These are different though related units, and I deal with that. | ||
Another reason I chose the 4th Skye - I don't want to be known as the "Wolf's Dragoons guy". :P | Another reason I chose the 4th Skye - I don't want to be known as the "Wolf's Dragoons guy". :P | ||
| + | |||
I always like to challenge myself with these articles, so I really tried to nail my reference formatting. Some have commented my articles are overly-lengthy in the past, and its a fair criticism. I try to present everything from the subject's perspective. If there was a five regiment on four regiment battle, yes, I name all nine regiments. But again, I keep the proper perspective. Now given that there were two novels involved, there was a lot of material. I broke it up as best I could, and as always, Doneve's pics really help. | I always like to challenge myself with these articles, so I really tried to nail my reference formatting. Some have commented my articles are overly-lengthy in the past, and its a fair criticism. I try to present everything from the subject's perspective. If there was a five regiment on four regiment battle, yes, I name all nine regiments. But again, I keep the proper perspective. Now given that there were two novels involved, there was a lot of material. I broke it up as best I could, and as always, Doneve's pics really help. | ||
| + | |||
So there you have it. Feedback of all kinds is always welcome. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] ([[User talk:ClanWolverine101|talk]]) 21:51, 21 January 2013 (PST) | So there you have it. Feedback of all kinds is always welcome. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] ([[User talk:ClanWolverine101|talk]]) 21:51, 21 January 2013 (PST) | ||
Revision as of 01:51, 22 January 2013
My own tools
- Edit Counter
- Archive Making
- Setting Up a Redirect
- External Links
- "Main" article link in a subsection, alternative name
- My Contributions
- Neuling's Wolf's Dragoons battles article
- Frabby's Update Needed Discussion
- Unfinished Book - JTP:New Avalon
Archives
First Major Project of 2013 - Rewritten: 4th Skye Rangers
"So CW - What have you been up to these last few weeks?"
I give you 4th Skye Rangers.
There are a bunch of reasons why I took this on. One was because I was always interested in these guys, who were the "villains" in two novels (Heir to the Dragon and the Dying Time), and only succeeded in "freeing" Skye with their own disbandment. Such a curious history!
The next was to show why I use the Update Needed tags the way I do. When i put one up, I don't usually mean to put one sentence from one particular publication. I want to put the whole thing in context. Since I found many unused references to the Fourth Skye, I decided to use them.
Another reason (and its bothered me awhile) was the whole "Lyran Rangers" controversy. At one point, some well intentioned individual named the article the Lyran Rangers, in the context that the Fourth Skye were sort of the pre-Lyran Rangers of the Dark Age era. This was somewhat understandable based on the Storm Hammers MW:DA Dossier, but was ultimately refuted in Field Manual: 3085. It also bothered me that a fairly famous unit was being reduced to a "Dark Age pre-unit". I address this issue in the context of the article. These are different though related units, and I deal with that. Another reason I chose the 4th Skye - I don't want to be known as the "Wolf's Dragoons guy". :P
I always like to challenge myself with these articles, so I really tried to nail my reference formatting. Some have commented my articles are overly-lengthy in the past, and its a fair criticism. I try to present everything from the subject's perspective. If there was a five regiment on four regiment battle, yes, I name all nine regiments. But again, I keep the proper perspective. Now given that there were two novels involved, there was a lot of material. I broke it up as best I could, and as always, Doneve's pics really help.
So there you have it. Feedback of all kinds is always welcome. ClanWolverine101 (talk) 21:51, 21 January 2013 (PST)