Difference between revisions of "User talk:Dmon"

 
(459 intermediate revisions by 33 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
__TOC__
 
__TOC__
=Archives and Project List=  
+
==Archives==  
 
{| cellspacing="10" style="background-color: inherit"
 
{| cellspacing="10" style="background-color: inherit"
|
 
*[[User talk:Dmon/To Do List|To Do List]]
 
 
|
 
|
 
*[[User talk:Dmon/Archive_2009|Talk Archive 2009]]
 
*[[User talk:Dmon/Archive_2009|Talk Archive 2009]]
Line 20: Line 18:
 
|
 
|
 
*[[User talk:Dmon/Archive_2019|Talk Archive 2019]]
 
*[[User talk:Dmon/Archive_2019|Talk Archive 2019]]
 +
|
 +
*[[User talk:Dmon/Archive 2020|Talk Archive 2020]]
 +
|
 +
*[[User talk:Dmon/Archive 2021|Talk Archive 2021]]
 +
|
 +
*[[User talk:Dmon/Archive 2022|Talk Archive 2022]]
 +
|}
 +
 +
==Project List==
 +
{| cellspacing="10" style="background-color: inherit"
 +
|
 +
*[[User talk:Dmon/To Do List|To Do List]]
 
|}
 
|}
  
 
=Current=
 
=Current=
 +
== Helping AlekBalderdash - links and Flechs ==
 +
 +
Hello Dmon.  I see that you freshly archived your talk page anad that I get christen with a post for the new year.  I have a matter for your attention.  I am conversing with [[User:AlekBalderdash]] who is a relatively new editor.  He has some questions about the proper usage of external links and also about Flechs sheets as a reference for various 'Mech variants.  (In his experimentation with links he has triggered the abuse filter.)  I know that there are some restictions on external links, but I could not quickly identify a handy reference page to help him.  Could you give him some assistance, both regarding the link issue as well as guidance/feedback on his specific ideas?  See [[User talk:AlekBalderdash#Record Sheets]]  --[[User:Dude RB|Dude RB]] ([[User talk:Dude RB|talk]]) 21:14, 4 January 2023 (EST)
 +
 +
== Delete pages 2023 II ==
 +
 +
Hi Dmon,
 +
 +
Can you delete this page:
 +
[[Zeus (Corporation)]]
 +
 +
Regards,--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 04:39, 23 January 2023 (EST)
 +
 +
== Delete pages 2023 III ==
 +
Can you please delete this category:
 +
* [[:Category:65/70 ton BattleMechs]]
 +
 +
Regards,--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 08:38, 27 February 2023 (EST)
 +
: Looks like Frabby beat me to it!--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:45, 27 February 2023 (EST)
 +
:: That particular issue almost saw me go down a side tangent and complain about over-automation in templates becoming a straight-jacket for editors whenever a special case pops up. Templates are to serve the editors, not the other way around. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 00:59, 3 March 2023 (EST)
 +
:::I do not really want any of this automation in the infoboxes, I have had loads of private talks with Deadfire about not letting him do more until he can come up with a solid example of it doing something better than our current methods.
 +
 +
:::And the weight automation is going to be scrapped when I get brave enough to update the'Mech infobox.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 09:49, 3 March 2023 (EST)
 +
 +
==IP edit reverts==
 +
Hi, I see you've reverted a bunch of edits that an IP made to various novel articles.  May I ask why? The edits looked legit where alphabetical order of featured 'Mechs was corrected; and a PDF search showed that adding the ''Archer'' to the list for ''Star Lord'' was also factually correct. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 00:59, 3 March 2023 (EST)
 +
:The re-removal of the starlord archer was my mistake but generally I was removing the mostly needless list collumns the editor was putting in and the entierly needless piping of the Clan 'Mechs when they already have redirects in place.
 +
 +
:I know I have been installing the list collumns on system articles where I expect to see the lists continually grow as we get more era info, most of the novel place and equipment lists are usually too short to truly warrant collumns, characters there is an arguement to have them but that is really a case by case situation.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 09:45, 3 March 2023 (EST)
 +
 +
==DA Governors==
 +
Just following up on the Republic Governor / Legate switches, it looks where this is happening between [[Dark Age: Republic of the Sphere]] and [[Dark Age: Republic Worlds (3130)]] (i.e. for say [[Prefecture III]]), other sources (such as [[Dark Age: 3132-3134 INN]]) are exclusively following Dark Age: Republic Worlds (3130) for the proper role where the characters get a mention. Accordingly unless I find some other complexity, I'm proposing to treat (with appropriate notes) the Dark Age: Republic Worlds (3130) listings as the correct one.--[[User:HF22|HF22]] ([[User talk:HF22|talk]]) 23:21, 4 March 2023 (EST)
 +
:Glad you have figured out what the error is. I knew it was there but had only thus far handled governors on an individual basis when they turned up in something else, so I was unsure of the specifics of the larger issue. How you plan to handle it is perfect, so only other wrinkle to keep an eye on is the fiction. I think at least one (Mirach) conflicts with both DA:RotS and DA:RW, but I would say the novels get priority in most cases as they flesh out the characters in their roles.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 04:27, 5 March 2023 (EST)
 +
:: The fiction is tying in pretty well so far, so hopefully not too many conflicts to deal with. As you say, for those which do have conflicts I think the novels will need to be preferred, since I believe they are mostly later in publication date as well as more detailed as to the characters.--[[User:HF22|HF22]] ([[User talk:HF22|talk]]) 06:49, 5 March 2023 (EST)
  
== Quintus Allard ==
+
== Category:Comstar Support Vehicles ==
  
 
Hi Dmon,
 
Hi Dmon,
  
Why do we not consider the head of the espionage of House Davion as an spy?--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 08:22, 2 January 2020 (EST)
+
Just wondering, why did you revert my edit there? [[User:Echo Mirage|Echo Mirage]] ([[User talk:Echo Mirage|talk]]) 13:55, 6 March 2023 (EST)
:Because we have no known cases of him acting as a spy. He was a diplomat and then minister of intelligence, they are both roles as a goverment official and who he is and what he does would be matters of public record.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 08:32, 2 January 2020 (EST)
+
:I was just about to write a comment on your page about it actually. Short version is that as I have mentioned to you before, "used by" is not what Sarna is doing. The MUL does it way better than we ever could so we have decided to not even try and compete.
  
==MechForce (Video Game)==
+
:I have been mulling over what to do about [[Blessed Order]] for a couple of days now.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 14:02, 6 March 2023 (EST)
Following your decision regarding Titans of Steel, do you feel [[MechForce (Video Game)]] should also be dumped? It doesn't appear to be a BT-related game, canon or fanon, and is far from a useful article, as it presently stands.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 11:20, 20 January 2020 (EST)
+
::That is somewhat circular reasoning since the MUL is often dependent on ''us'' for info. [[User:Echo Mirage|Echo Mirage]] ([[User talk:Echo Mirage|talk]]) 14:04, 6 March 2023 (EST)
:The article itself suffers pretty badly from the "data dump" that video game articles seem to aquire and as such needs a massive cleanup. I have a suspiccion that the article does belong here but possibly more in the way that we have articles about the Unseen and the ELH copyright case. From what I can tell the game was something similar to what MegaMek is today with the main difference being that CGL/Microsoft allow MegaMek to operate but FASA apparently at very least threatened the creator of MechForce with legal action.  
+
:::Yes parts of the MUL draws from us, but so does a lot of stuff that is BT related. Ray calls it the "Sarna effect", but not trying to compete with the MUL is something else. We can't do it on a technical level. The MUL is a database built for the purpose of being a searchable force builder. Sarna is a wiki, trying to build a comprehensive force builder using a wiki format is likely possible, but it would be an absolute monster to organise.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 14:24, 6 March 2023 (EST)
 +
::::Wasn't trying to put together a full list of equipment, as you said, it would be a true monster to take on indeed. I was just trying to give a sense of the range of equipment the Blessed Order had access to, with a bit of an emphasis on the some of the more unusual and/or obscure stuff. It is easy enough to overlook the Order's custom built OmniMechs, for instance. Which reminds me, I forgot to mention that the BO installed cruise missile launchers on at least some of their ''Fortress''-class DropShips. I'll head over their now and add that little tidbit. [[User:Echo Mirage|Echo Mirage]] ([[User talk:Echo Mirage|talk]]) 15:50, 11 March 2023 (EST)
 +
:::::Quick correction to my last, it appears it was actually just the ''Duat''-class DropShips that were fitted with cruise missiles. [[User:Echo Mirage|Echo Mirage]] ([[User talk:Echo Mirage|talk]]) 15:58, 11 March 2023 (EST)
  
:I have a friend who is big into the retro games scene who I have asked to put some feelers out and see if he can dig anything up for us.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 11:35, 20 January 2020 (EST)
+
== Military Operation names and caps ==
 +
Hiya, it has just come to my attention that you suggested in the [[BattleTechWiki:Manual of Style]] that Sarna BTW should stick to the policy of writing out military operation names in all caps, even though CGL has abandoned the practice. I was actually glad to see this go away as I always hated it. I think I understand where you're coming from which is why I suggested in the policy that neither spelling (all caps or merely capitalized) is technically wrong. This way, existing articles and links do not have to be updated. But I really don't like the prospect of carrying this weird spelling into the future when even CGL have dropped it again. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 05:38, 9 March 2023 (EST)
 +
:Yeah I implemented the style at a time that CGL didn't seem to know how they wanted to handle it. When CGL settled on a style and Rev brought it up, my suggestion was mostly based on the fact that the work has already been done. I am not a fan of us flopping between styles. As long as they commit to doing all of it, somebody who wants to spend the time reversing all the work can.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 14:02, 9 March 2023 (EST)
  
::Excellent. Thank you.--[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 14:13, 20 January 2020 (EST)
+
== Noble houses ==
  
==Star Lord notes==
+
All right, what's wrong with having the names appear in two places? It does no harm and it makes it easier for people to find. And many of the families that use lowercase particles are noted in their canon entries as the ''von X'' family, not the ''X'' family. [[User:Madness Divine|Madness Divine]] ([[User talk:Madness Divine|talk]]) 22:32, 6 May 2023 (EDT)
Hiya, wanted to ask why you axed the Notes section in the [[Star Lord (novel)]] article? I agree that details on Dawn's future may not be relevant, but I thought the part about "Thomas Marik" in the book being almost certainly the double is worth mentioning. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 04:59, 21 February 2020 (EST)
+
: Never mind; I had the technical issue explained to me. [[User:Madness Divine|Madness Divine]] ([[User talk:Madness Divine|talk]]) 22:58, 6 May 2023 (EDT)
:Hey Frabby, I removed the note about Dawn pretty much for the reason you stated. The part about using the head to test the DNA of [[Stefan Amaris VII]] is interesting but also utter speculation. "Thomas Marik" for the purposes of the story is Thomas Marik with no indication that he is acting in any capacity other than as the ruler of the FWL. In universe the other characters consider him to be Thomas Marik and the revelations about him being a plant are largely another decade off. As such I felt that the note had very little relevance to the book.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 09:34, 21 February 2020 (EST)
 
  
== Nominations ==
+
== Added references for Snow Fox ==
 +
 
 +
Hi Dmon,
  
Thanks for the nomination!! What I would love would be to one day this year if possible write or reddo an article which I really feel is a very good improvement as and stand alone contribution. I have one in mind, complex and that might well spur some interesting "discussions". I'll just need to find the time. My daughter wAS BORN Premature this past year and its being hard, hapyilly hard, but nevertheless hard (the capital letters here are her doing as its helping me write :).--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 06:15, 22 February 2020 (EST)
+
I added reference link in Snow Fox article, it was MUL date
:My pleasure PS, you deserve all the nominations for all of the awards :-p. I am really bad at writing articles myself so I totally understand the desire to make a stand alone contribution like that. Kinda why I put so much time into digging out all of the noble families and titles. Over time I think it has started to become something useful to people.
 
  
:I am so glad your daughter is doing well, my sisters youngest was a month premature so I understand some of the issues you must of faced. Even more respect my friend!--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 06:45, 22 February 2020 (EST)
+
They removed standard Snow Fox from the list and Snow Fox Omni was added in following era
  
== House Steiner Family Tree ==
+
RecGuide described Omni project as success
  
My physical of House Steiner family tree from [[House Steiner]] and from [[House Steiner (The Lyran Commonwealth)]] are very different as we are seeing. Which is the good source?? I do not want to start changing without first asking.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 13:02, 27 February 2020 (EST)
+
That's the only one I remember that needed references, let me know if there are others
:I think it might be a case of checking as many sources as we can and build a tree based on evidence from multiple sources where we can. So I think a good starting point is finding the differences as it will give us an idea just how much we need to check.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:07, 27 February 2020 (EST)
+
::There's also a pretty clear guideline for cases of directly contradictory information, namely that later sources trump earlier sources - but only if they truly contradict each other, and only in the absence of other rulings or information. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 16:36, 27 February 2020 (EST)
+
[[Snow Fox]]
:::I started on the [[House Davion]] family tree and have run into the same problem right away. It's going to be a deep dive into several books to truly make sense of the inconsistencies. I agree with Frabby, though, newer sources supersede old unless specifically ruled otherwise.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 10:44, 28 February 2020 (EST)
 
::::If you have scans of those family trees, I'd love to get copies of them... [[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 15:48, 28 February 2020 (EST)
 
  
== Character Articles ==
+
Regards,--[[User:Warhawk14|Warhawk14]] ([[User talk:Warhawk14|talk]]) 22:10, 09 May 2023 (EST)
Hi Dmon,<br>
+
:Good work!--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 17:42, 10 May 2023 (EDT)
  
I'm a bit slow these days, but I just noticed when digging out a minor character article I'd put in (to use as a template for the next) that where I've been listing people's professions (MechWarrior, military officer, etc) you've been swapping them instead to their most recent rank. I just wanted to check the reasoning, because I'm a little nonplussed - to me, a rank isn't a profession or an occupation. In my line of work, a General's profession isn't being a General, it's being an Army officer - being a General is just one particular moment in their overall career. In theory, where we've got people mentioned in multiple sources over the course of their career, if I'm to list their current rank as their profession, the articles run the risk of being out of date. Gavilán Camacho is a Major in the novel I'm data-mining at the moment, but I know from other articles on Sarna that he later becomes a Lieutenant Colonel, and then a full Colonel. To me, his profession is the same - he's a mercenary officer - but his rank changes with each source, so it makes more sense to me to keep his profession as mercenary officer. What're your thoughts? [[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 07:55, 2 March 2020 (EST)
+
== RE: Hellcat (Hellhound II) ==
:Hey BM,
+
Howdy. I was going to add the Hellcat page for RG:iClan vol. 30 since its an outstanding red link but noticed you had deleted it earlier. Is this because it is similar to the Conjurer or another reason? Should I go ahead and add the page?
 +
--[[User:KhorneHub|KhorneHub]] ([[User talk:KhorneHub|talk]]) 13:08, 11 June 2023 (EDT)
 +
:Hey Khornehub,
  
:The short answer to the question is that I use the characters highers rank / position or what ever their career high point mostly out of personal preference. Longer answer is that the character infobox needs updating to include titles, ranks and positions because profession on it's own is borderline redundant when boiled down to things like Noble, Military officer, mercenary, politician and Mechwarrior. Due to the nature of the BT universe we could probably use the Mechwarrior profession on 95% of all character articles, I do not think that would be of any use to anybody. At the same time updating the infobox for every character article would be a titanic task and would likely be quite time consuming. So instead I have chosen to take the attitude that the content of the profession listing is a flexible thing.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 19:46, 2 March 2020 (EST)
+
:No nothing like that at all, In theory the links on the front page should get updated every week but I often forget and have left them for as long as a month to six weeks in the past. I updated the links as part of a personal effort to be more consistent... this is three weeks in a row I have remembered! The [[Hellcat (Hellhound II)]] still needs an article if you want to have a stab at it.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:24, 11 June 2023 (EDT)
  
::I'm personally not all that bothered by so many MechWarriors appear on here (although, if we ever do actually generate an article for every character ever mentioned, there should be a fair number of nobles, pilots et al to go with them) … in part, I'm not bothered, because worrying about lots of 'Mech jocks being listed on a wiki that's predominantly all about 'Mechs feels a little like worrying that a wiki about plumbing mentions a lot of plumbers, tap-fitters and sanitation engineers... {{ emoticon | ;) }} [[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 15:33, 6 March 2020 (EST)
+
== Delete pages 2023 IV ==
  
== Thanks for deleting what I detect from time to time ==
+
Hi Dmon;
  
Just that.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 06:07, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
+
I made a mistkae. This page [[PowerTech 250]] should be deleted.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 06:47, 22 June 2023 (EDT)
:The wiki is a team effort man, helping each other out is what it is all about! {{ emoticon | ;) }}--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 07:29, 2 April 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Planets Category ==
+
== Delete pages 2023 V ==
Hi Dmon - I just wanted to ask, is it worth asking Nic if he can run a bot to replace Category: Planets with Category: Systems in all the planets articles, rather than doing them all manually? It might save a bit of time... [[User:BrokenMnemonic|BrokenMnemonic]] ([[User talk:BrokenMnemonic|talk]]) 03:02, 3 April 2020 (EDT)
 
:It certainly is. But then there's the faction categories which still go for "planet" instead of "system" - the idea of automating the process is one of the reasons I had raised the point. I don't see how we can automate the updating of some 157 sub-categories. Many (most?) of these will be smallish categories that could be done manually, but combined it's a big workload. And more importantly, there are significant overlaps, so when manually doing a system article you can fix all its categories. Not sure if that's easily possible with a bot. But that's for Nic to answer. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 04:35, 3 April 2020 (EDT)
 
:::I was thinking about asking him but have realised that we likely have no way of getting a bot to do the planet redirects with roman numerals so it would partially render the change pointless. I am ok to do it manually as long as people don't mind me doing it at the rate of a few a day rather than trying to do it in one go and losing my sanity!--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 06:45, 3 April 2020 (EDT)
 
::::Np, I'll check the double redirects as I've taken this as my personal control zone trying to avoid them. Good luck and patience.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 10:16, 3 April 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Clan Engines ==
+
Hi Dmon,
I have been thinking on how to tackle Clan Engines. Most of the time they are not branded, so for example 305 XL, but there are a few cases were they are branded... and of course without any kind of rule or logic that I can see. How would you do this for the Engines project.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 07:42, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
 
:Hey PS, at the moment I think any unbranded engine Clan or IS would be ok to simply link to for example [[250 Extralight Fusion Engine]] rather than the branded [[Magna 250 XL]] sub-section. At some point I do intend to create an engine specific infobox that will have details of IS and Clan versions. I just need to sit down and figure out the best way to make it work.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 08:21, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Ciro Ramirez ==
+
I have a list of pages to delete:
I do not own the english version of the Lethal Heritage books, but being spanish I know how we organize our surnames. Ciro Oquendo y Ramirez is indeed a full name, usually meaning Ciro's father's surname is Oquendo and Ramirez being the mother's first surname. I know he is in the [[1st Somerset Strikers (sourcebook)]] named as Ciro Ramirez... but I can tell you that is not the spanish way to build the surnames.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 13:32, 16 May 2020 (EDT)
+
* [[Apollo (disambiguation)]]
:I did not know surnames where handled differently in spain, so thank you for correcting me. 1st Somerset Strikers does list his full name as Ciro Oquendo y Ramirez in the text of the profile if not the main title. But this does mean that the name becomes quite long and distorts the infobox a bit. So what would be the correct way to shorten a name in spain?--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:39, 16 May 2020 (EDT)
+
* [[Ferenc (disambiguation)]]
::We do not shorten them to be sincere now, but nobles of the past usually highlighted their first surname as in Medieval ages, the male's surname was the most important. The spanish version of the book names Ciro as Ciro Oquendo when reducing his name.
+
* [[Jason (94th Falcon Striker)]]
 +
* [[Patrick Finnegan (WD)]]
 +
* [[Steven Graham (WD)]]
 +
* [[Thomas Gordon (WD)]]
 +
* [[Twenty-First Centauri Lancers]]
 +
* [[Wendy Hayes (WD)]]
  
::Historically speaking, if the woman was of noble born and her family had money and titles, surnames were linked by the "y" or "-", but this is not even happening now. Indeed now, when your first son/daughter is born you can select the order of his surname. By default is 1st father and then 1st mother, but you can order them the other way around.
+
And these files that are not used any longer:
 +
* File:RotS Knights emblem.jpg
 +
* File:RotS Knights-Errant emblem.jpg
 +
* File:RotS Paladin emblem.jpg
 +
* File:RotS Senate emblem.jpg
  
::Everybody in Spain, and also central and south america has the two surnames.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 14:13, 16 May 2020 (EDT)
+
Thanks in advance.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 12:09, 27 June 2023 (EDT)
:::Cool info, thanks Pere. May be worth getting an official answer on the BT Forum's Ask The Line Developer section. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 14:33, 16 May 2020 (EDT)
 
::::A ok, so it is essentially the same thing as the ''British'' hyphenated name but reversed, the "traditional" way it is handled in england is the womans name first and the males afterwards and any shortened version would just use the male's name as it is mostly taken in order to preserve a family name which would have become extinct due to the absence of male descendants bearing the name, connected to the inheritance of a family estate. Outside nobility such names are unusual.
 
  
::::Also just checked Lethal Heritage and Ciro's name is shortened to Oquendo in the english version too.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 15:10, 16 May 2020 (EDT)
+
== Award ==
:::::Checking his biography, it is a Ramirez who got the medal from Kerenky, so he and his famili would like to make that relevant.[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 18:13, 16 May 2020 (EDT)
+
Thanks for always being so helpful. Not that you need another, but it's well deserved! [[File:DA 1bol.jpg|Direction Appreciated Award, 2nd ribbon]] https://youtu.be/Z9nCW6HJsmY --[[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 21:55, 30 June 2023 (EDT)
  
== Moratorium Policy ==
+
== Delete pages 2023 VI ==
Regarding the [[Policy:Moratorium|Moratorium Policy]], shell entries can be created as long as no narrative information is included, correct? An example being [[Marotta Kerensky]] right after the publication of ''[[Divided We Fall]]''. Thanks. --<span style="font-family:Courier">[[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]]</span> <sup>([[User talk:Ebakunin|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Ebakunin|contribs]])</sup> 20:00, 26 May 2020 (EDT)
 
:The policy itself does not actually say anything about shell aricles beyond creating an article for the product itself. Up until now I had not actually realised that this is not specifically outlined in the policy. I tend not to create them myself for fear of giving the wrong impression to editors who might go onto violate the Moratorium Policy by mistake, but that is just my personal take on this aspect.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 20:18, 26 May 2020 (EDT)
 
::Fwiw, I never considered shell articles a problem and even think they're good to have, to show users that yes, we're aware of this issue but refrain from covering it in detail just for a bit. Keep in mind that the Moratorium policy is a self-imposed policy with the goal of not spoiling info from new commercial releases, nothing more, nothing less. Shell articles don't spoil anything. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 00:58, 27 May 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Moratoriums on 'Mechs ==
+
Can you please delete these ones:
 +
* [[Bradus (disambiguation)]]
 +
* [[Gus Avery (DH)]]
 +
* [[Gus Avery (WH)]]
 +
* [[Phillip Ivester Jr.]]
 +
* [[Poter Erickson (DH)]]
 +
* [[Poter Erickson (WH)]]
 +
* [[Rena (disambiguation)]]
 +
* [[Sean Eric Kevin]]
 +
* [[Treh (disambiguation)]]
  
''[[Divided We Fall]]'' includes the complete technical readout of the brand new ''[[Dominator]]'' 'Mech. Are those specs also covered by the moratorium policy? Thanks. --<span style="font-family:Courier">[[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]]</span> <sup>([[User talk:Ebakunin|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Ebakunin|contribs]])</sup> 17:09, 31 May 2020 (EDT)
+
And thanks in advance.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 09:03, 5 July 2023 (EDT)
:There will be people out there who would buy the book just for those stats so I would say the stats are very much under the moratorium.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 17:46, 31 May 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== First names vs. Last Names? ==
+
:Hi Pserratv, I'm with you on keeping a tidy Wiki! In the next week or two I'll be continuing to go through old character articles that were created years ago before the current format was standardized. Even now there are twice as many more added than you posted, and Dmon is pretty good about deleting them in reasonable time. So I wouldn't worry about it. --[[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 22:41, 7 July 2023 (EDT)
  
Dmon - Did they change the policy regarding using a character's first name as opposed to their last name? Thanks. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] ([[User talk:ClanWolverine101|talk]]) 17:14, 31 May 2020 (EDT)
+
== Delete pages 2023 VI ==
:I didn't actually know it was a policy, most of the time I have just been doing what feels best as I am writing. I am a pretty weak article writer, I just stitch together little factoids and it can feel a bit odd repeating their name in every one.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 17:50, 31 May 2020 (EDT)
 
:: For what its worth, i like most of your writing. I was just asking because when i read your articles, it seems to be a lot of first names, which isn't standard on other wikis. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] ([[User talk:ClanWolverine101|talk]]) 18:35, 31 May 2020 (EDT)
 
::: I shall try to mix it up a bit better in future! {{ emoticon | ;) }}--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 19:52, 31 May 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Minsk silhouette Replacement Image ==
+
Hi Dmon,
Hi Dmon, sorry bother you about minor issue.  A new editor uploaded Matt Plog's art for the forth coming [[Minsk]] to be featured in [[Technical Readout: Golden Century]].  Problem is he uploaded over the Silhouette of the Minsk, which as far i'm aware not the place to put it. I hate delete a "new" editors work, would you be able talk to him/her about that's not how we do it.  Silhouette was canon allowable image until the image was legally open to use.  We've lost / ticked off players by undoing new-editor like moves.  I'm nearly semi-retired (let's face it i can't keep up with all rapid-fire editing done now) so it's best for active editor to talk to this person. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] ([[User talk:Wrangler|talk]]) 22:31, 19 June 2020 (EDT)  ‎
 
:Realistically speaking, that is not the silhouette of the ''Minsk''. That is the silhouette of the nuSeen ''Warhammer'' that was used to represent the ''Minsk''. The real issue is that the artwork currently falls under the moratorium period and needs to be taken down.--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 16:07, 20 June 2020 (EDT)
 
::Of course, after reverting the image, I realize that I was mistaken on the moratorium violation. The image was given out as a free preview on the BT forum, so it does not fall under moratorium. As for the silhouette, do we need to get tied up in labeling a placeholder image as a canon silhouette? Or can we just rename the image to reflect the new artwork?--[[User:Cache|Cache]] ([[User talk:Cache|talk]]) 16:18, 20 June 2020 (EDT)
 
:::Sorry I have taken all day to get back on this. The image is not under Moratorium but it does need to be named correctly, meaning I do still need to have a word with the initial uploader to let them know we are not deleting their work. I do not think we need to worry about labeling the place holder but I am going to do a fresh upload of the Minsk artwork as the silhouette file has no real relation to the Minsk file. --[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 16:26, 20 June 2020 (EDT)
 
::::The Silhouette was used for the Minsk from the [[Turning Points: Tokasha]], which was valid canon image(at the time) so it could use for it. I was aware it was NuSeen Warhammer, but it was the image which was being used at the time as "sneak preview" for the Minsk. I'm not internally sure the NuSeen Warhammer had officially come out at that moment in time.  The image can be changed or removed since it will not be needed anymore since I was the one whom uploaded it as the Minsk Silhouette in the first place. The silhouette could be still in use for other things if the Classic Warhammer image isn't entirely wiped out. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] ([[User talk:Wrangler|talk]]) 08:21, 22 June 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== First Strike Pilots ==
+
Me again needing help for deleting pages...
 +
Can you delete these pages:
 +
* [[Alita (Aerospace pilot)]]
 +
* [[Alita (Clan Wolf)]]
 +
* [[Alita (MechWarrior)]]
 +
* [[Bradus (disambiguation)]]
 +
* [[Bradus (16th Battle)]]
 +
* [[Bradus (Aerospace pilot)]]
 +
* [[Bradus (MechWarrior)]]
 +
* [[Gell (disambiguation)]]
 +
* [[Gell (Clan Wolf)]]
 +
* [[Gell (Jade Falcon)]]
 +
* [[Marcellus (disambiguation)]]
 +
* [[Marcellus (Aerospace pilot)]]
 +
* [[Marcellus (Clan Wolf)]]
 +
* [[Zasser (disambiguation)]]
  
Dmon - Quick question - do you think the pilots in the First Strike book are worthy of their own articles? Thanks. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] ([[User talk:ClanWolverine101|talk]]) 22:16, 2 July 2020 (EDT)
+
Thanks in advance.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 08:01, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
:I do. Something I have learned over my time on the wiki is that the writers of the BT universe spend an enormous amount of effort filling every product with tiny links to the rest of the universe. With the number of characters in First Strike I am almost certain at least some of them will show up in other products.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 22:33, 2 July 2020 (EDT)
 
::Fair enough. Thanks. [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] ([[User talk:ClanWolverine101|talk]]) 22:39, 2 July 2020 (EDT)
 
:::Even if they do not. Going through the book I also managed to pin down the death of [[Colonel]] [[Bartholomew Alcàla]] and close the gap we had in the table of commaning officer of the [[1st Free Worlds Guards]] and add some place names to planet articles so I think the effort is worth it.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 22:44, 2 July 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Zibler's House undos ==
+
== Category and page needed mess ==
  
I saw you reverted my changes. Can I ask why? The brother added has the 3 of them market as his family (siblings), so if it is a mistake in the original one, we should correct it right?--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 14:57, 18 July 2020 (EDT)
+
Hi Dmon,
:What brother? Heather is the mother.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 15:03, 18 July 2020 (EDT)
 
::I'm very tired... 16h working and at least 3 more to go...--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 16:55, 18 July 2020 (EDT)
 
:::I know the feeling man, In my old job I did 3 years of 70hr working weeks. I didn't know what felt like not to be tired.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 17:44, 18 July 2020 (EDT)
 
::::This has been my latest months, from Monday to Sunday... --[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 17:53, 18 July 2020 (EDT)
 
:::::Sad times man.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 18:03, 18 July 2020 (EDT)
 
::::::I miss being with my family, I miss my friends and I miss writing here.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 18:26, 18 July 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Delete pages ==
+
We have now several pages as wanted that are dummy for template issues and also several templates with the same problem that are hiding real pages / categories that would be needed.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 08:02, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
 +
: Do you mean all the random stuff that Deadfire is creating? I am aware of the issue and wish I knew what he was doing but most of the time when I ask him he replies with a link to a coding "help page" that has quite obviously been written in such a manner as to be as unhelpful as possible.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 12:29, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
 +
:: It's also unhelpful to not provide information or examples on what is wrong. --[[User:Deadfire|Deadfire]] ([[User talk:Deadfire|talk]]) 13:19, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
 +
::: I am pretty sure PS means the fact that the needed articles list is currently not a list of needed articles. [[Special:WantedPages]], excluding the three Russian titles, we don't get an actual needed article until item no. 63--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:25, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
 +
:::: Sounds like a priority for me to get fixed/filled in. I will add it to my [[User:Deadfire/Task list]], and start working on it. Though many MediaWiki admins wished Special:WantedPages to only include the main namespace, it simply hasn't been fixed to do so.
 +
::::: Yes, I meant that. And also on the missing categories, as now we have like 80 something and most are ''technical'' in nature.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 03:57, 16 July 2023 (EDT)
  
Hi Dmon, can you delete this unused and/or wrong categories:
+
== Category Orphaned pages ==
* [[:Category:Works by Chris Grainger]]
+
 
* [[:Category:Mechwarrior Online-based Mechs]]
+
Hi Dmon,
* [[:Category:Misc Commands]]
+
 
* [[:Category:Minor Factions]]
+
We have here thousands of characters listed here as we are creating entries for each mechwarrior in any supplement. Now, would it be ok to have a sort of "warriors page" to clean this up? It is not something I like (we have the categories for this), but it is again hiding potential cross-references missing.
* [[:Category:Talk header templates]]
+
 
 +
Any idea?--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 08:05, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
 +
:I am not overly bothered about the orphaned pages at this point. I do have an idea that could provide a lot of cross-referencing potential but I have not put any time into it to develop it yet, there are a few big projects that need fixing before we start a new one. I am not a fan of the idea of a warriors page at all as it doesn't really serve any purpose beyond providing a home for the orphans.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 12:39, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
==Partner up!==
 +
Hi, my name is Kate and I am the founder of the Independent Fallout Wiki (over yonder at [https://fallout.wiki/ fallout.wiki]). A few members of our community recommended your wiki as one we should reach out to in order to partner up with (big fans!) The Independent Fallout Wiki split off the corporately hosted wiki to give independence a whirl in April 2022. We want to strengthen relationships between other independent wikis, as our community has interests that span beyond Fallout and are excited to check out other independent sites.
 +
 
 +
What does a partnership even mean? Good question! On our end, we feature your website on the wiki as both an article and part of the home page spotlight rotation. If you have a Discord, we also feature your invite along with links to your YouTube/website/videos. If you have similar spaces, we just ask that you do the same for us. You can check out the list of our current wiki buddies [https://fallout.wiki/wiki/FalloutWiki:Affiliates here]!
 +
 
 +
These partnerships work well to connect independent wikis, lead to new friends, and are generally good vibes across the board. I appreciate you considering our request to partner up! If you feel like giving it a go or have any questions, feel free to respond here or message me on Discord (kateaces). Thank you so much in advance. -[[User:Kid Aces|'''''Kate Aces''''']] [[File:MWO Charger.png|25px|link=User talk:Kid Aces]] <sup>[[User talk:Kid Aces|''We’ve got ‘em on the run!'']]</sup> 01:17, 23 August 2023 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
== Delete pages 2023 VIII ==
 +
 
 +
Hi Dmon,
 +
 
 +
Could you please delete these pages:
 +
* [[Edasich Compact 255]]
 +
* [[340 VOX Light]]
 +
 
 +
Thanks in advance.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 05:44, 7 November 2023 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== Removing notes from articles ==
 +
 
 +
Hi Dmon,
  
I would say we should also delete as it no longer fits the Wiki:
+
I removed those BLP notes, as I am concerned to have them included as mere conjecture by BLP that he believes he created the mechs without evidence. This note has been attributed to approximately 60 mechs, and as it doesn't contain anything but a link to BLP's blog without evidence (and is refuted in at least one case, see the Stone Rhino), it feels inflammatory to leave a note on so many pages without actual citations. I know that's why it's a note, and not a citation, but it feels excessive and would possibly be better served just to be on Pardoe's page and not for every one of these mechs. These notes were only added in the last year or so, at the same time the controversy regarding BLP was happening, and is seen by many as being used as a way to stake Pardoe's brand on the story. Whether this is the case or not it feels disingenuine to leave the notes with only a link to a blog from years ago that was only very recently included on the wiki.
* [[:Category:PeopleCustom]] --> This is a listing of all fan-created characters who have articles on BTW.
 
  
This is of course a suggestion.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 10:53, 19 July 2020 (EDT)
+
If possible I'd like this escalated up for discussion with the other admins. As I don't want to step on more toes by removing additional posts. If anything leaving these notes only engages with the controversial situation, especially as the admin responsible for adding these notes was the one writing about the situation with BLP & Faith/Ace so might be seen as biased reporting  (again, be it true or not, this is just how it comes across). I am happy to discuss this further off the wiki if that helps, as I am engaged with quite a few people in the community who have raised this concern.
::Thanks!!--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 13:05, 19 July 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Category Uncategorized files ==
+
I will leave it up to your fantastic team. Thank you for hearing me out. Appreciate all your work.{{Unsigned|EnbyKaiju}}
Should we create a "Category" for the Maps?? To clean this category?--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 11:04, 19 July 2020 (EDT)
 
:I am not sure how the bot works so I am not sure if there would be a knock on effect when the planets team next update the images.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:00, 19 July 2020 (EDT)
 
::Nothing then, I'll try to sort out from here not planet maps and that is all.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 13:04, 19 July 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Article Naming for battles ==
+
:Hiya, as the editor who put up the notes, let me assure you that it was a coincidence that I did that around the same time when all the other stuff happened. It never occurred to me that people might see a connection, beyond by fear that he might take the blog down. BLP's blog is a fantastic window into the very early history of BT and I felt the info was worth having on Sarna. As for its veracity, I give BLP the benefit of doubt and am inclined to believe when he says he wrote certain writeups. Iirc he even admits that he might be misremembering sometimes.
 +
:Regarding the Stone Rhino, can you elaborate? [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 14:10, 13 November 2023 (EST)
  
I noticed that you recently moved several articles for battles to include the year of the engagement. (For example, [[Battle of Wolcott]] to [[Battle of Wolcott (3050)]].) The [[Policy:Article_Naming#Battles|relevant policy]] seems to indicate that the year should be included only when there were multiple battles at the same location. Am I missing something here? I ask because I recently split off a new article for the [[Battle of Huntress]], and I anticipate working on the [[Battle of Trafalgar]] in the near future, and I want to be consistent with current policy. [[User:Tosta Dojen|Tosta Dojen]] ([[User talk:Tosta Dojen|talk]]) 15:03, 25 July 2020 (EDT)
+
::I'll add my two cents in support of changes here. The blog post in question ''opens'' with "I might be wrong." He admits that his memory of the development may be flawed, and subsequently a lot of this is conjecture with no way to verify the veracity of his claims for most of the units he lists. There are some notes on 'Mechs that he showcased that absolutely do deserve recognition, such as the original drafts of the BattleMaster and Shadow Hawk stats, but everything else has about as much credibility as spitballing the names of people you think you might've gone to high school with. "Trust me bro" is not sufficient cause to have authorial credit on ~60 pages. His contributions to the creation of these units belongs on one place, if any, and that is [[Blaine_Lee_Pardoe|on his article page,]] where it can be provided with more context regarding his self-admitted uncertainty than it currently receives as a footnote. --[[User:Einherjarvalk|Einherjarvalk]] ([[User talk:Einherjarvalk|talk]]) 17:54, 13 November 2023 (EST)
:Hey TD,
 
  
:In truth I should probably update the wording of the policy. I tend to put the date in as standard because given the nature of the BTU (the setting of a war game) it is fairly safe to assume most planets have seen more than one military action.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 17:09, 25 July 2020 (EDT)
+
:::Not quite sure what to answer, except that I still don’t see why the info ''shouldn't'' be a trivia item in the respective 'Mech articles. Sure, it could go into the BLP article and probably should be there, too. There’s no reason why the info can’t be in both places. But I reckon the 'Mechs are more central to Sarna BTW than BLP so that's where the info belongs in my opinion. And while it should be taken with a grain of salt, I still consider it noteworthy enough to mention. There is nothing to suggest BLP doesn’t believe what he posted there. (Ok, bad example - he apparently believes and posts a lot more than BT history and most people including myself are not ok with that - but you get what I’m saying.) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 14:47, 14 November 2023 (EST)
  
::If it's up for discussion, I think the policy is better as it stands. While you're correct that naming conflicts will come up frequently, that's adequately handled by including the date when the name is otherwise ambiguous. I don't think it's a good reason to include the date by default when there's no actual conflict. It seems jarring to me to refer to the "Battle of Trafalgar (3059)" or the "Battle of the Kyoto Zen Arcology Project (3072)" when there are no other battles with those names. [[User:Tosta Dojen|Tosta Dojen]] ([[User talk:Tosta Dojen|talk]]) 12:20, 26 July 2020 (EDT)
+
::::The reason the info doesn't belong in the trivia section is because there is no evidence to support those claims for the majority of the units listed. For some, such as the aforementioned Shadow Hawk and BattleMaster, Blaine has shown his work and thus can and should receive credit for having a formative hand in their development. For the others, it strongly feels like he's simply trying to solidify his claim as a "founding father of BattleTech," a claim that he continues to lean on in order to push his version of the narrative surrounding his release from the writing team while marketing his new work, even over a year later. Regardless, whether or not Pardoe believes he's telling the truth is immaterial (and, by his own admission, he's not sure it even is the truth). If Sarna is to maintain its reputation as a reliable source of objectively true information about BattleTech, "I believe this is true (but I could be wrong)" is not sufficient cause for the content to remain where it is. I believe that Sarna would benefit more from having the list he lays claim to placed on his article page, and the "behind-the-scenes" materials he posted about the 'Mechs that he has an '''undeniable''' claim to developing transplanted from his blog to the corresponding 'Mech articles and cited accordingly. At that point, whatever Blaine does with his blog becomes immaterial, and the relevant information is preserved where it should be. --[[User:Einherjarvalk|Einherjarvalk]] ([[User talk:Einherjarvalk|talk]]) 16:19, 14 November 2023 (EST)
  
:::Everything is up for discussion and review, continued refinement is a good thing. In this case though I do not really feel that strongly about changing the policy it is just an idea. [[User:Dmon/Conflicts|Project Battles]] has been on the backburner for about a year and is currently little more than a list mostly lifted from TRO:3025, a list somebody put together of [[Wolf's Dragoons battles]] and the [[:Category:Military Operations|skeleton of a category system]].--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 13:23, 26 July 2020 (EDT)
+
Hey EnbyKaiju,
  
::::I'll keep my current initiatives as they are, then. I've added [[Policy:Article Naming]] to my watchlist, so if there's a discussion over there about implementing your proposed change, I'll weigh in. [[User:Tosta Dojen|Tosta Dojen]] ([[User talk:Tosta Dojen|talk]]) 14:14, 26 July 2020 (EDT)
+
I appreciate you getting back to me and explaining your position. This topic has been discussed amongst the Admin team a few times over the last year, I understand your concerns about the potential for bias. Sarna Admins do not officially have specific roles but as a team we each broadly take on different duties, Frabby is the guy who makes the core of most of our policies around [[Policy:Notability|Notability]], [[Policy:Moratorium|Moratorium]] and [[Policy:Canon|Canon]]. He also takes on writing a lot of the more "sensitive" articles that we have concerns about being refuted or causing issues simply by existing. Stuff like the [[Eridani Light Horse lawsuit]], [[Pride Anthology 2023]] and yes the BLP situation. Because Frabby writes our canon policy, he spends a lot of time working on the Apocryphal and esoterica like the [[Battledroids]], [[TCI Model Sets]], [[BattleTechnology]] and other very early history of BT stuff. The fact that Frabby wrote about both the BLP situation and BLPs Blog about early 'Mech designs is not from the Sarna teams perspective anything unusual. However we do fully understand how the unfortunate timing can be seen as something potentialy suspicious from the outside.
  
== Template:InfoBoxConflict ==
+
In truth I can't guarentee that there is absolutely no bias in any of the articles Frabby has ever written, but what I can say is that I have worked with him for getting close to twenty years and honestly believe that out of everybody who works on Sarna, Frabby is by far the most evenhanded.
  
Hi,
+
Hey Einherjarvalk,
  
The result on this template [[Template:InfoBoxConflict]] does not appear, and if references are added here, they are not taken into account for the page. For example: [[DeChavilier Massacre]], where I've been forced to change the links otherwise it had reference errors.--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 18:37, 7 August 2020 (EDT)
+
The lack of evidence to support the claims is exactly why the information is in the notes section as trivia. Sarna has a [[Policy:Assume good faith|Good Faith]] policy that extends to Authors and people who are involved in the development of the BattleTech Universe. I myself recently have made a "announced product" article for [[Without Question]] based on Bryan Young mentioning it as his next novel during an AMA chat.  
:Some changes have been made to the template. I will have a look and see if I can figure out exactly what it is that is stopping the references from working.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 19:00, 7 August 2020 (EDT)
 
::It looks like [[Special:Diff/615514|this change]] causes the result part of the InfoBox not to appear; it deleted some instances of 'result' along with 'status'. That would break references if they're defined within the result section. [[User:Tosta Dojen|Tosta Dojen]] ([[User talk:Tosta Dojen|talk]]) 20:29, 7 August 2020 (EDT)
 
:::Ah, I thought it would just remove the 'Status' section.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 21:25, 7 August 2020 (EDT)
 
::::I've made [[Special:Diff/615669|a change]] that should restore the 'Result' field without the deprecated 'Status' option. I've checked a few articles and it looks good to me. Check things out and see if the function of InfoBoxConflict is back to working like it should. [[User:Tosta Dojen|Tosta Dojen]] ([[User talk:Tosta Dojen|talk]]) 12:33, 8 August 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Jonathan Limpo ==
+
Does the note about BLPs blog need to be in every 'Mech article? probably not, but to say that having the note there is enough to call Sarnas reputation as a reliable source of objectively true information about BattleTech into dispute is likely a bit far. The notes on Sarna have been made by a respected Sarna Admin in good faith (especially with neither myself or Frabby being American, taking sides in a disagreement about American political stances is a bit bizarre). Unless Frabby decides that his edits where in error or the rest of the Admin team come to a consensus to remove the notes, I am going to maintain the current status quo.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 19:38, 14 November 2023 (EST)
  
Hi Dmon,--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 18:41, 7 August 2020 (EDT)
+
:I am honored and a bit flattered. But still, "Frabby said so" is not a valid argument. I am just one out of many editors. And I don’t "write" Sarna's policies, not in the sense of deciding them. User consensus does. I merely had an active role in hammering out many policies back in the early days and happened to create the agreed-upon text.
 +
:That said, I'm with Dmon on this one. Our existing policies support having those bits of trivia. Conversely, there is nothing requiring Sarna to avoid mentioning them. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 14:49, 15 November 2023 (EST)
  
I saw you have undone my change here. My base to do that was that in his bio he is already marked as [[Duke of Carse]], so in the line I thought it was better to split it as [[Duke]] of [[Carse]], giving a direct link to the Duke page and also to the Carse planet within a single click.
+
== Delete page 2024 I ==
:I personally like the link to the specific title over the generic Duke link, but I can also see the link to the planet being useful. Maybe I am bias because the title articles are my personal project!--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 19:04, 7 August 2020 (EDT)
 
  
== Roger/Richard Davion ==
+
Can you please delete this one Dmon:
 +
[[Electra (Individual Cameron-class WarShip)]]
 +
Regards,--[[User:Pserratv|Pserratv]] ([[User talk:Pserratv|talk]]) 12:13, 17 January 2024 (EST)
  
There are several articles (e.g., [[Royalston Capellan March Militia]]) claiming that the [[Preparedness Act]] was enacted by First Prince Roger Davion in 2735. On the other hand, the [[Preparedness Act]] article claims it was enacted in that year by [[Richard Davion]], whose article supports the claim that Richard was First Prince in 2735.
+
== Primitive Battlemech deletion? ==
  
I don't have access to the sourcebooks cited, but I know you're working on the noble houses. Can you fact-check this? I can clean up the erroneous references once I know which Richard/Roger is correct. [[User:Tosta Dojen|Tosta Dojen]] ([[User talk:Tosta Dojen|talk]]) 14:37, 9 August 2020 (EDT)
+
Just wondering why the Primitive Battlemech category was deleted last month? It was pretty useful for my AoW games.[[User:TheRedBee|TheRedBee]] ([[User talk:TheRedBee|talk]]) 23:50, 27 March 2024 (EDT)
:Just had a look and [[Field Report 2765: Federated Suns]] has Richard listed on pages 3 and 4 but page 21 (the [[Royalston Capellan March Militia]] page) has Roger. The case for it being Richard is supported by the fact he was in power at the time as you noted, with Roger having died in 2703. So the references are correct but the Militia article and Preparedness Act article need a note added saying that the error is in the book itself.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 14:58, 9 August 2020 (EDT)
 

Latest revision as of 23:50, 27 March 2024

Archives[edit]

Project List[edit]

Current[edit]

Helping AlekBalderdash - links and Flechs[edit]

Hello Dmon. I see that you freshly archived your talk page anad that I get christen with a post for the new year. I have a matter for your attention. I am conversing with User:AlekBalderdash who is a relatively new editor. He has some questions about the proper usage of external links and also about Flechs sheets as a reference for various 'Mech variants. (In his experimentation with links he has triggered the abuse filter.) I know that there are some restictions on external links, but I could not quickly identify a handy reference page to help him. Could you give him some assistance, both regarding the link issue as well as guidance/feedback on his specific ideas? See User talk:AlekBalderdash#Record Sheets --Dude RB (talk) 21:14, 4 January 2023 (EST)

Delete pages 2023 II[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Can you delete this page: Zeus (Corporation)

Regards,--Pserratv (talk) 04:39, 23 January 2023 (EST)

Delete pages 2023 III[edit]

Can you please delete this category:

Regards,--Pserratv (talk) 08:38, 27 February 2023 (EST)

Looks like Frabby beat me to it!--Dmon (talk) 13:45, 27 February 2023 (EST)
That particular issue almost saw me go down a side tangent and complain about over-automation in templates becoming a straight-jacket for editors whenever a special case pops up. Templates are to serve the editors, not the other way around. Frabby (talk) 00:59, 3 March 2023 (EST)
I do not really want any of this automation in the infoboxes, I have had loads of private talks with Deadfire about not letting him do more until he can come up with a solid example of it doing something better than our current methods.
And the weight automation is going to be scrapped when I get brave enough to update the'Mech infobox.--Dmon (talk) 09:49, 3 March 2023 (EST)

IP edit reverts[edit]

Hi, I see you've reverted a bunch of edits that an IP made to various novel articles. May I ask why? The edits looked legit where alphabetical order of featured 'Mechs was corrected; and a PDF search showed that adding the Archer to the list for Star Lord was also factually correct. Frabby (talk) 00:59, 3 March 2023 (EST)

The re-removal of the starlord archer was my mistake but generally I was removing the mostly needless list collumns the editor was putting in and the entierly needless piping of the Clan 'Mechs when they already have redirects in place.
I know I have been installing the list collumns on system articles where I expect to see the lists continually grow as we get more era info, most of the novel place and equipment lists are usually too short to truly warrant collumns, characters there is an arguement to have them but that is really a case by case situation.--Dmon (talk) 09:45, 3 March 2023 (EST)

DA Governors[edit]

Just following up on the Republic Governor / Legate switches, it looks where this is happening between Dark Age: Republic of the Sphere and Dark Age: Republic Worlds (3130) (i.e. for say Prefecture III), other sources (such as Dark Age: 3132-3134 INN) are exclusively following Dark Age: Republic Worlds (3130) for the proper role where the characters get a mention. Accordingly unless I find some other complexity, I'm proposing to treat (with appropriate notes) the Dark Age: Republic Worlds (3130) listings as the correct one.--HF22 (talk) 23:21, 4 March 2023 (EST)

Glad you have figured out what the error is. I knew it was there but had only thus far handled governors on an individual basis when they turned up in something else, so I was unsure of the specifics of the larger issue. How you plan to handle it is perfect, so only other wrinkle to keep an eye on is the fiction. I think at least one (Mirach) conflicts with both DA:RotS and DA:RW, but I would say the novels get priority in most cases as they flesh out the characters in their roles.--Dmon (talk) 04:27, 5 March 2023 (EST)
The fiction is tying in pretty well so far, so hopefully not too many conflicts to deal with. As you say, for those which do have conflicts I think the novels will need to be preferred, since I believe they are mostly later in publication date as well as more detailed as to the characters.--HF22 (talk) 06:49, 5 March 2023 (EST)

Category:Comstar Support Vehicles[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Just wondering, why did you revert my edit there? Echo Mirage (talk) 13:55, 6 March 2023 (EST)

I was just about to write a comment on your page about it actually. Short version is that as I have mentioned to you before, "used by" is not what Sarna is doing. The MUL does it way better than we ever could so we have decided to not even try and compete.
I have been mulling over what to do about Blessed Order for a couple of days now.--Dmon (talk) 14:02, 6 March 2023 (EST)
That is somewhat circular reasoning since the MUL is often dependent on us for info. Echo Mirage (talk) 14:04, 6 March 2023 (EST)
Yes parts of the MUL draws from us, but so does a lot of stuff that is BT related. Ray calls it the "Sarna effect", but not trying to compete with the MUL is something else. We can't do it on a technical level. The MUL is a database built for the purpose of being a searchable force builder. Sarna is a wiki, trying to build a comprehensive force builder using a wiki format is likely possible, but it would be an absolute monster to organise.--Dmon (talk) 14:24, 6 March 2023 (EST)
Wasn't trying to put together a full list of equipment, as you said, it would be a true monster to take on indeed. I was just trying to give a sense of the range of equipment the Blessed Order had access to, with a bit of an emphasis on the some of the more unusual and/or obscure stuff. It is easy enough to overlook the Order's custom built OmniMechs, for instance. Which reminds me, I forgot to mention that the BO installed cruise missile launchers on at least some of their Fortress-class DropShips. I'll head over their now and add that little tidbit. Echo Mirage (talk) 15:50, 11 March 2023 (EST)
Quick correction to my last, it appears it was actually just the Duat-class DropShips that were fitted with cruise missiles. Echo Mirage (talk) 15:58, 11 March 2023 (EST)

Military Operation names and caps[edit]

Hiya, it has just come to my attention that you suggested in the BattleTechWiki:Manual of Style that Sarna BTW should stick to the policy of writing out military operation names in all caps, even though CGL has abandoned the practice. I was actually glad to see this go away as I always hated it. I think I understand where you're coming from which is why I suggested in the policy that neither spelling (all caps or merely capitalized) is technically wrong. This way, existing articles and links do not have to be updated. But I really don't like the prospect of carrying this weird spelling into the future when even CGL have dropped it again. Frabby (talk) 05:38, 9 March 2023 (EST)

Yeah I implemented the style at a time that CGL didn't seem to know how they wanted to handle it. When CGL settled on a style and Rev brought it up, my suggestion was mostly based on the fact that the work has already been done. I am not a fan of us flopping between styles. As long as they commit to doing all of it, somebody who wants to spend the time reversing all the work can.--Dmon (talk) 14:02, 9 March 2023 (EST)

Noble houses[edit]

All right, what's wrong with having the names appear in two places? It does no harm and it makes it easier for people to find. And many of the families that use lowercase particles are noted in their canon entries as the von X family, not the X family. Madness Divine (talk) 22:32, 6 May 2023 (EDT)

Never mind; I had the technical issue explained to me. Madness Divine (talk) 22:58, 6 May 2023 (EDT)

Added references for Snow Fox[edit]

Hi Dmon,

I added reference link in Snow Fox article, it was MUL date

They removed standard Snow Fox from the list and Snow Fox Omni was added in following era

RecGuide described Omni project as success

That's the only one I remember that needed references, let me know if there are others

Snow Fox

Regards,--Warhawk14 (talk) 22:10, 09 May 2023 (EST)

Good work!--Dmon (talk) 17:42, 10 May 2023 (EDT)

RE: Hellcat (Hellhound II)[edit]

Howdy. I was going to add the Hellcat page for RG:iClan vol. 30 since its an outstanding red link but noticed you had deleted it earlier. Is this because it is similar to the Conjurer or another reason? Should I go ahead and add the page? --KhorneHub (talk) 13:08, 11 June 2023 (EDT)

Hey Khornehub,
No nothing like that at all, In theory the links on the front page should get updated every week but I often forget and have left them for as long as a month to six weeks in the past. I updated the links as part of a personal effort to be more consistent... this is three weeks in a row I have remembered! The Hellcat (Hellhound II) still needs an article if you want to have a stab at it.--Dmon (talk) 13:24, 11 June 2023 (EDT)

Delete pages 2023 IV[edit]

Hi Dmon;

I made a mistkae. This page PowerTech 250 should be deleted.--Pserratv (talk) 06:47, 22 June 2023 (EDT)

Delete pages 2023 V[edit]

Hi Dmon,

I have a list of pages to delete:

And these files that are not used any longer:

  • File:RotS Knights emblem.jpg
  • File:RotS Knights-Errant emblem.jpg
  • File:RotS Paladin emblem.jpg
  • File:RotS Senate emblem.jpg

Thanks in advance.--Pserratv (talk) 12:09, 27 June 2023 (EDT)

Award[edit]

Thanks for always being so helpful. Not that you need another, but it's well deserved! Direction Appreciated Award, 2nd ribbon https://youtu.be/Z9nCW6HJsmY --Csdavis715 (talk) 21:55, 30 June 2023 (EDT)

Delete pages 2023 VI[edit]

Can you please delete these ones:

And thanks in advance.--Pserratv (talk) 09:03, 5 July 2023 (EDT)

Hi Pserratv, I'm with you on keeping a tidy Wiki! In the next week or two I'll be continuing to go through old character articles that were created years ago before the current format was standardized. Even now there are twice as many more added than you posted, and Dmon is pretty good about deleting them in reasonable time. So I wouldn't worry about it. --Csdavis715 (talk) 22:41, 7 July 2023 (EDT)

Delete pages 2023 VI[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Me again needing help for deleting pages... Can you delete these pages:

Thanks in advance.--Pserratv (talk) 08:01, 12 July 2023 (EDT)

Category and page needed mess[edit]

Hi Dmon,

We have now several pages as wanted that are dummy for template issues and also several templates with the same problem that are hiding real pages / categories that would be needed.--Pserratv (talk) 08:02, 12 July 2023 (EDT)

Do you mean all the random stuff that Deadfire is creating? I am aware of the issue and wish I knew what he was doing but most of the time when I ask him he replies with a link to a coding "help page" that has quite obviously been written in such a manner as to be as unhelpful as possible.--Dmon (talk) 12:29, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
It's also unhelpful to not provide information or examples on what is wrong. --Deadfire (talk) 13:19, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
I am pretty sure PS means the fact that the needed articles list is currently not a list of needed articles. Special:WantedPages, excluding the three Russian titles, we don't get an actual needed article until item no. 63--Dmon (talk) 13:25, 12 July 2023 (EDT)
Sounds like a priority for me to get fixed/filled in. I will add it to my User:Deadfire/Task list, and start working on it. Though many MediaWiki admins wished Special:WantedPages to only include the main namespace, it simply hasn't been fixed to do so.
Yes, I meant that. And also on the missing categories, as now we have like 80 something and most are technical in nature.--Pserratv (talk) 03:57, 16 July 2023 (EDT)

Category Orphaned pages[edit]

Hi Dmon,

We have here thousands of characters listed here as we are creating entries for each mechwarrior in any supplement. Now, would it be ok to have a sort of "warriors page" to clean this up? It is not something I like (we have the categories for this), but it is again hiding potential cross-references missing.

Any idea?--Pserratv (talk) 08:05, 12 July 2023 (EDT)

I am not overly bothered about the orphaned pages at this point. I do have an idea that could provide a lot of cross-referencing potential but I have not put any time into it to develop it yet, there are a few big projects that need fixing before we start a new one. I am not a fan of the idea of a warriors page at all as it doesn't really serve any purpose beyond providing a home for the orphans.--Dmon (talk) 12:39, 12 July 2023 (EDT)

Partner up![edit]

Hi, my name is Kate and I am the founder of the Independent Fallout Wiki (over yonder at fallout.wiki). A few members of our community recommended your wiki as one we should reach out to in order to partner up with (big fans!) The Independent Fallout Wiki split off the corporately hosted wiki to give independence a whirl in April 2022. We want to strengthen relationships between other independent wikis, as our community has interests that span beyond Fallout and are excited to check out other independent sites.

What does a partnership even mean? Good question! On our end, we feature your website on the wiki as both an article and part of the home page spotlight rotation. If you have a Discord, we also feature your invite along with links to your YouTube/website/videos. If you have similar spaces, we just ask that you do the same for us. You can check out the list of our current wiki buddies here!

These partnerships work well to connect independent wikis, lead to new friends, and are generally good vibes across the board. I appreciate you considering our request to partner up! If you feel like giving it a go or have any questions, feel free to respond here or message me on Discord (kateaces). Thank you so much in advance. -Kate Aces MWO Charger.png We’ve got ‘em on the run! 01:17, 23 August 2023 (EDT)

Delete pages 2023 VIII[edit]

Hi Dmon,

Could you please delete these pages:

Thanks in advance.--Pserratv (talk) 05:44, 7 November 2023 (EST)

Removing notes from articles[edit]

Hi Dmon,

I removed those BLP notes, as I am concerned to have them included as mere conjecture by BLP that he believes he created the mechs without evidence. This note has been attributed to approximately 60 mechs, and as it doesn't contain anything but a link to BLP's blog without evidence (and is refuted in at least one case, see the Stone Rhino), it feels inflammatory to leave a note on so many pages without actual citations. I know that's why it's a note, and not a citation, but it feels excessive and would possibly be better served just to be on Pardoe's page and not for every one of these mechs. These notes were only added in the last year or so, at the same time the controversy regarding BLP was happening, and is seen by many as being used as a way to stake Pardoe's brand on the story. Whether this is the case or not it feels disingenuine to leave the notes with only a link to a blog from years ago that was only very recently included on the wiki.

If possible I'd like this escalated up for discussion with the other admins. As I don't want to step on more toes by removing additional posts. If anything leaving these notes only engages with the controversial situation, especially as the admin responsible for adding these notes was the one writing about the situation with BLP & Faith/Ace so might be seen as biased reporting (again, be it true or not, this is just how it comes across). I am happy to discuss this further off the wiki if that helps, as I am engaged with quite a few people in the community who have raised this concern.

I will leave it up to your fantastic team. Thank you for hearing me out. Appreciate all your work.— The preceding unsigned comment was posted by EnbyKaiju (talkcontribs) .

Hiya, as the editor who put up the notes, let me assure you that it was a coincidence that I did that around the same time when all the other stuff happened. It never occurred to me that people might see a connection, beyond by fear that he might take the blog down. BLP's blog is a fantastic window into the very early history of BT and I felt the info was worth having on Sarna. As for its veracity, I give BLP the benefit of doubt and am inclined to believe when he says he wrote certain writeups. Iirc he even admits that he might be misremembering sometimes.
Regarding the Stone Rhino, can you elaborate? Frabby (talk) 14:10, 13 November 2023 (EST)
I'll add my two cents in support of changes here. The blog post in question opens with "I might be wrong." He admits that his memory of the development may be flawed, and subsequently a lot of this is conjecture with no way to verify the veracity of his claims for most of the units he lists. There are some notes on 'Mechs that he showcased that absolutely do deserve recognition, such as the original drafts of the BattleMaster and Shadow Hawk stats, but everything else has about as much credibility as spitballing the names of people you think you might've gone to high school with. "Trust me bro" is not sufficient cause to have authorial credit on ~60 pages. His contributions to the creation of these units belongs on one place, if any, and that is on his article page, where it can be provided with more context regarding his self-admitted uncertainty than it currently receives as a footnote. --Einherjarvalk (talk) 17:54, 13 November 2023 (EST)
Not quite sure what to answer, except that I still don’t see why the info shouldn't be a trivia item in the respective 'Mech articles. Sure, it could go into the BLP article and probably should be there, too. There’s no reason why the info can’t be in both places. But I reckon the 'Mechs are more central to Sarna BTW than BLP so that's where the info belongs in my opinion. And while it should be taken with a grain of salt, I still consider it noteworthy enough to mention. There is nothing to suggest BLP doesn’t believe what he posted there. (Ok, bad example - he apparently believes and posts a lot more than BT history and most people including myself are not ok with that - but you get what I’m saying.) Frabby (talk) 14:47, 14 November 2023 (EST)
The reason the info doesn't belong in the trivia section is because there is no evidence to support those claims for the majority of the units listed. For some, such as the aforementioned Shadow Hawk and BattleMaster, Blaine has shown his work and thus can and should receive credit for having a formative hand in their development. For the others, it strongly feels like he's simply trying to solidify his claim as a "founding father of BattleTech," a claim that he continues to lean on in order to push his version of the narrative surrounding his release from the writing team while marketing his new work, even over a year later. Regardless, whether or not Pardoe believes he's telling the truth is immaterial (and, by his own admission, he's not sure it even is the truth). If Sarna is to maintain its reputation as a reliable source of objectively true information about BattleTech, "I believe this is true (but I could be wrong)" is not sufficient cause for the content to remain where it is. I believe that Sarna would benefit more from having the list he lays claim to placed on his article page, and the "behind-the-scenes" materials he posted about the 'Mechs that he has an undeniable claim to developing transplanted from his blog to the corresponding 'Mech articles and cited accordingly. At that point, whatever Blaine does with his blog becomes immaterial, and the relevant information is preserved where it should be. --Einherjarvalk (talk) 16:19, 14 November 2023 (EST)

Hey EnbyKaiju,

I appreciate you getting back to me and explaining your position. This topic has been discussed amongst the Admin team a few times over the last year, I understand your concerns about the potential for bias. Sarna Admins do not officially have specific roles but as a team we each broadly take on different duties, Frabby is the guy who makes the core of most of our policies around Notability, Moratorium and Canon. He also takes on writing a lot of the more "sensitive" articles that we have concerns about being refuted or causing issues simply by existing. Stuff like the Eridani Light Horse lawsuit, Pride Anthology 2023 and yes the BLP situation. Because Frabby writes our canon policy, he spends a lot of time working on the Apocryphal and esoterica like the Battledroids, TCI Model Sets, BattleTechnology and other very early history of BT stuff. The fact that Frabby wrote about both the BLP situation and BLPs Blog about early 'Mech designs is not from the Sarna teams perspective anything unusual. However we do fully understand how the unfortunate timing can be seen as something potentialy suspicious from the outside.

In truth I can't guarentee that there is absolutely no bias in any of the articles Frabby has ever written, but what I can say is that I have worked with him for getting close to twenty years and honestly believe that out of everybody who works on Sarna, Frabby is by far the most evenhanded.

Hey Einherjarvalk,

The lack of evidence to support the claims is exactly why the information is in the notes section as trivia. Sarna has a Good Faith policy that extends to Authors and people who are involved in the development of the BattleTech Universe. I myself recently have made a "announced product" article for Without Question based on Bryan Young mentioning it as his next novel during an AMA chat.

Does the note about BLPs blog need to be in every 'Mech article? probably not, but to say that having the note there is enough to call Sarnas reputation as a reliable source of objectively true information about BattleTech into dispute is likely a bit far. The notes on Sarna have been made by a respected Sarna Admin in good faith (especially with neither myself or Frabby being American, taking sides in a disagreement about American political stances is a bit bizarre). Unless Frabby decides that his edits where in error or the rest of the Admin team come to a consensus to remove the notes, I am going to maintain the current status quo.--Dmon (talk) 19:38, 14 November 2023 (EST)

I am honored and a bit flattered. But still, "Frabby said so" is not a valid argument. I am just one out of many editors. And I don’t "write" Sarna's policies, not in the sense of deciding them. User consensus does. I merely had an active role in hammering out many policies back in the early days and happened to create the agreed-upon text.
That said, I'm with Dmon on this one. Our existing policies support having those bits of trivia. Conversely, there is nothing requiring Sarna to avoid mentioning them. Frabby (talk) 14:49, 15 November 2023 (EST)

Delete page 2024 I[edit]

Can you please delete this one Dmon: Electra (Individual Cameron-class WarShip) Regards,--Pserratv (talk) 12:13, 17 January 2024 (EST)

Primitive Battlemech deletion?[edit]

Just wondering why the Primitive Battlemech category was deleted last month? It was pretty useful for my AoW games.TheRedBee (talk) 23:50, 27 March 2024 (EDT)