Talk:GTD Legion - Revision history

General Battuta at 12:20, 20 April 2012

2012-04-20T12:20:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:20, 20 April 2012
Line 17:		Line 17:
	***I'm with Battuta on separating canon and non-canon material. Apart from being a little distracting, it also encourages the behaviour of people like ITA Master (among others) who decide to go and add their non-canon stuff to canon pages. I also think we should seriously consider completely redoing articles like [[Terran-Vasudan War]] which are almost entirely made up of non-canon stuff, despite ostensibly covering a 'canon' subject. N.B. I remember having a hilariously awesome flamewar with Mobius over this very topic a while back. Good times. :) - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)		***I'm with Battuta on separating canon and non-canon material. Apart from being a little distracting, it also encourages the behaviour of people like ITA Master (among others) who decide to go and add their non-canon stuff to canon pages. I also think we should seriously consider completely redoing articles like [[Terran-Vasudan War]] which are almost entirely made up of non-canon stuff, despite ostensibly covering a 'canon' subject. N.B. I remember having a hilariously awesome flamewar with Mobius over this very topic a while back. Good times. :) - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
	*Battuta: Well, the BP Carthage entry is quite informative, clearly separated from canon, so it's fine. However, what information is gained from adding BP tech descriptions for beams? I remember reading some story background in them, but apart from that, some technical talk. If you want them on the Wiki, I suggest creating a separate [[Blue Planet tech descriptions]] article. Snail: I don't have time to read the T-V War discussion history - here or at HLP - so apologies if I say something already said: canon and non-canon are clearly separated, and the means of separation (colors) is explained in clear English at the top, so personally I have no problem with that. If you want, I have no objections to trimming down the current article to canon info only, as long as you move Eisthmo's timeline to a separate article, for the sake of the preserving that information. Note, however, that the canon article will be ''very'' short. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 05:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)		*Battuta: Well, the BP Carthage entry is quite informative, clearly separated from canon, so it's fine. However, what information is gained from adding BP tech descriptions for beams? I remember reading some story background in them, but apart from that, some technical talk. If you want them on the Wiki, I suggest creating a separate [[Blue Planet tech descriptions]] article. Snail: I don't have time to read the T-V War discussion history - here or at HLP - so apologies if I say something already said: canon and non-canon are clearly separated, and the means of separation (colors) is explained in clear English at the top, so personally I have no problem with that. If you want, I have no objections to trimming down the current article to canon info only, as long as you move Eisthmo's timeline to a separate article, for the sake of the preserving that information. Note, however, that the canon article will be ''very'' short. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 05:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
			**I agree that the BP Carthage article is fine, and I agree that adding the BP tech descriptions to the beam articles would add very little. I think you misunderstand, though - I'm not saying I want them on the Wiki as part of the canon articles, I'm saying that they should be kept in separate articles. Similarly, I don't think the Legion entry should mix canon and ST:R material. There should be a separate Legion (ST:R) article. Otherwise we'll end up with situations like the Colossus page describing every silly campaign where the GTVA builds 40 more of them and they're all covered in BFReds.[[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 12:20, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

TopAce: /* Non-canon material on 'canon' articles */

2012-04-20T05:52:03Z

Non-canon material on 'canon' articles

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:52, 20 April 2012
Line 16:		Line 16:
	**You're right, it does, but I'm just worried about articles that mix canon material with non-canon stuff, even if clearly marked. For example, it'd be pretty irritating for every single FreeSpace 2 beam weapon to have a Blue Planet tech description in a red box. Or, in this example, for the GTD Carthage's entry in the FS2 ship list to have the Blue Planet entry included in a non-canon box. Maybe I'm jumping at shadows? [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 22:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		**You're right, it does, but I'm just worried about articles that mix canon material with non-canon stuff, even if clearly marked. For example, it'd be pretty irritating for every single FreeSpace 2 beam weapon to have a Blue Planet tech description in a red box. Or, in this example, for the GTD Carthage's entry in the FS2 ship list to have the Blue Planet entry included in a non-canon box. Maybe I'm jumping at shadows? [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 22:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
	***I'm with Battuta on separating canon and non-canon material. Apart from being a little distracting, it also encourages the behaviour of people like ITA Master (among others) who decide to go and add their non-canon stuff to canon pages. I also think we should seriously consider completely redoing articles like [[Terran-Vasudan War]] which are almost entirely made up of non-canon stuff, despite ostensibly covering a 'canon' subject. N.B. I remember having a hilariously awesome flamewar with Mobius over this very topic a while back. Good times. :) - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)		***I'm with Battuta on separating canon and non-canon material. Apart from being a little distracting, it also encourages the behaviour of people like ITA Master (among others) who decide to go and add their non-canon stuff to canon pages. I also think we should seriously consider completely redoing articles like [[Terran-Vasudan War]] which are almost entirely made up of non-canon stuff, despite ostensibly covering a 'canon' subject. N.B. I remember having a hilariously awesome flamewar with Mobius over this very topic a while back. Good times. :) - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
			*Battuta: Well, the BP Carthage entry is quite informative, clearly separated from canon, so it's fine. However, what information is gained from adding BP tech descriptions for beams? I remember reading some story background in them, but apart from that, some technical talk. If you want them on the Wiki, I suggest creating a separate [[Blue Planet tech descriptions]] article. Snail: I don't have time to read the T-V War discussion history - here or at HLP - so apologies if I say something already said: canon and non-canon are clearly separated, and the means of separation (colors) is explained in clear English at the top, so personally I have no problem with that. If you want, I have no objections to trimming down the current article to canon info only, as long as you move Eisthmo's timeline to a separate article, for the sake of the preserving that information. Note, however, that the canon article will be ''very'' short. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 05:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Snail: thoughts

2012-04-20T02:54:29Z

thoughts

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:54, 20 April 2012
Line 15:		Line 15:
	*Wait, the BP Carthage already has an article [[GTD Carthage (BP)\|here]]. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 16:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		*Wait, the BP Carthage already has an article [[GTD Carthage (BP)\|here]]. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 16:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
	**You're right, it does, but I'm just worried about articles that mix canon material with non-canon stuff, even if clearly marked. For example, it'd be pretty irritating for every single FreeSpace 2 beam weapon to have a Blue Planet tech description in a red box. Or, in this example, for the GTD Carthage's entry in the FS2 ship list to have the Blue Planet entry included in a non-canon box. Maybe I'm jumping at shadows? [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 22:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		**You're right, it does, but I'm just worried about articles that mix canon material with non-canon stuff, even if clearly marked. For example, it'd be pretty irritating for every single FreeSpace 2 beam weapon to have a Blue Planet tech description in a red box. Or, in this example, for the GTD Carthage's entry in the FS2 ship list to have the Blue Planet entry included in a non-canon box. Maybe I'm jumping at shadows? [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 22:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
			***I'm with Battuta on separating canon and non-canon material. Apart from being a little distracting, it also encourages the behaviour of people like ITA Master (among others) who decide to go and add their non-canon stuff to canon pages. I also think we should seriously consider completely redoing articles like [[Terran-Vasudan War]] which are almost entirely made up of non-canon stuff, despite ostensibly covering a 'canon' subject. N.B. I remember having a hilariously awesome flamewar with Mobius over this very topic a while back. Good times. :) - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

General Battuta: /* Non-canon material on 'canon' articles */

2012-04-19T22:07:22Z

Non-canon material on 'canon' articles

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:07, 19 April 2012
Line 14:		Line 14:
	Setting aside the issue of where 'Legion' comes from anyway: cool, look, a mod note on a canon article! Can I go add a Blue Planet box on the Carthage? (I don't think this is a good idea or a good precedent to set.) [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		Setting aside the issue of where 'Legion' comes from anyway: cool, look, a mod note on a canon article! Can I go add a Blue Planet box on the Carthage? (I don't think this is a good idea or a good precedent to set.) [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
	*Wait, the BP Carthage already has an article [[GTD Carthage (BP)\|here]]. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 16:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		*Wait, the BP Carthage already has an article [[GTD Carthage (BP)\|here]]. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 16:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
			**You're right, it does, but I'm just worried about articles that mix canon material with non-canon stuff, even if clearly marked. For example, it'd be pretty irritating for every single FreeSpace 2 beam weapon to have a Blue Planet tech description in a red box. Or, in this example, for the GTD Carthage's entry in the FS2 ship list to have the Blue Planet entry included in a non-canon box. Maybe I'm jumping at shadows? [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 22:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

TopAce: /* Non-canon material on 'canon' articles */

2012-04-19T16:32:19Z

Non-canon material on 'canon' articles

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:32, 19 April 2012
Line 13:		Line 13:

	Setting aside the issue of where 'Legion' comes from anyway: cool, look, a mod note on a canon article! Can I go add a Blue Planet box on the Carthage? (I don't think this is a good idea or a good precedent to set.) [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		Setting aside the issue of where 'Legion' comes from anyway: cool, look, a mod note on a canon article! Can I go add a Blue Planet box on the Carthage? (I don't think this is a good idea or a good precedent to set.) [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
			*Wait, the BP Carthage already has an article [[GTD Carthage (BP)\|here]]. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 16:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

General Battuta at 15:02, 19 April 2012

2012-04-19T15:02:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:02, 19 April 2012
Line 12:		Line 12:
	==Non-canon material on 'canon' articles==		==Non-canon material on 'canon' articles==

	Setting aside the issue of where 'Legion' comes from anyway: cool, look, a mod note on a canon article! Can I go add a Blue Planet box on the Carthage? (I don't think this is a good idea or a good precedent to set.)		Setting aside the issue of where 'Legion' comes from anyway: cool, look, a mod note on a canon article! Can I go add a Blue Planet box on the Carthage? (I don't think this is a good idea or a good precedent to set.) [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

General Battuta: hmm this is an interesting issue we should talk about it

2012-04-19T15:01:56Z

hmm this is an interesting issue we should talk about it

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:01, 19 April 2012
Line 8:		Line 8:

	Fixed the grammar, but the substance of the story remains the same. I just wish we had some Volition Watch article or something to link to. Doesn't anyone remember when and where this meeting with V took place, and isn't there some kind of transcript? [[User:Mustang19\|Mustang19]]		Fixed the grammar, but the substance of the story remains the same. I just wish we had some Volition Watch article or something to link to. Doesn't anyone remember when and where this meeting with V took place, and isn't there some kind of transcript? [[User:Mustang19\|Mustang19]]


			==Non-canon material on 'canon' articles==

			Setting aside the issue of where 'Legion' comes from anyway: cool, look, a mod note on a canon article! Can I go add a Blue Planet box on the Carthage? (I don't think this is a good idea or a good precedent to set.)

Mustang19 at 19:20, 28 August 2007

2007-08-28T19:20:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:20, 28 August 2007
Line 6:		Line 6:

	Altered it to fit with the story as it was told by Eishmto, feel free to change it back or fix further; working from memory. - [[User:ngtm1r\|ngtm1r]]		Altered it to fit with the story as it was told by Eishmto, feel free to change it back or fix further; working from memory. - [[User:ngtm1r\|ngtm1r]]

			Fixed the grammar, but the substance of the story remains the same. I just wish we had some Volition Watch article or something to link to. Doesn't anyone remember when and where this meeting with V took place, and isn't there some kind of transcript? [[User:Mustang19\|Mustang19]]

Ngtm1r: /* Unsure */

2007-08-28T17:39:27Z

Unsure

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:39, 28 August 2007
Line 4:		Line 4:

	I'm not even sure if there ''is'' an FS2 ref bible. People call it the Legion because of a certain interview with [V] staff. [V] staff confirmed that it was ''not'' the Galatea. Someone asked if it was the Legion, and [V] staff said "Call it that if you want." So there's no real certainty about the Legion, unless you take that vague answer. - [[User:Snail\|Snail]]		I'm not even sure if there ''is'' an FS2 ref bible. People call it the Legion because of a certain interview with [V] staff. [V] staff confirmed that it was ''not'' the Galatea. Someone asked if it was the Legion, and [V] staff said "Call it that if you want." So there's no real certainty about the Legion, unless you take that vague answer. - [[User:Snail\|Snail]]

			Altered it to fit with the story as it was told by Eishmto, feel free to change it back or fix further; working from memory. - [[User:ngtm1r\|ngtm1r]]

Snail at 14:07, 24 August 2007

2007-08-24T14:07:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:07, 24 August 2007
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Someone with the FS2 reference bible should look at the cutscene script and see what this destroyer is called. I have a copy lying around on my hard drive, I think, I just can't find it on my PC or on the Net. [[User:Mustang19\|Mustang19]]		Someone with the FS2 reference bible should look at the cutscene script and see what this destroyer is called. I have a copy lying around on my hard drive, I think, I just can't find it on my PC or on the Net. [[User:Mustang19\|Mustang19]]

			I'm not even sure if there ''is'' an FS2 ref bible. People call it the Legion because of a certain interview with [V] staff. [V] staff confirmed that it was ''not'' the Galatea. Someone asked if it was the Legion, and [V] staff said "Call it that if you want." So there's no real certainty about the Legion, unless you take that vague answer. - [[User:Snail\|Snail]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:20, 20 April 2012
Line 17:		Line 17:
	***I'm with Battuta on separating canon and non-canon material. Apart from being a little distracting, it also encourages the behaviour of people like ITA Master (among others) who decide to go and add their non-canon stuff to canon pages. I also think we should seriously consider completely redoing articles like [[Terran-Vasudan War]] which are almost entirely made up of non-canon stuff, despite ostensibly covering a 'canon' subject. N.B. I remember having a hilariously awesome flamewar with Mobius over this very topic a while back. Good times. :) - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)		***I'm with Battuta on separating canon and non-canon material. Apart from being a little distracting, it also encourages the behaviour of people like ITA Master (among others) who decide to go and add their non-canon stuff to canon pages. I also think we should seriously consider completely redoing articles like [[Terran-Vasudan War]] which are almost entirely made up of non-canon stuff, despite ostensibly covering a 'canon' subject. N.B. I remember having a hilariously awesome flamewar with Mobius over this very topic a while back. Good times. :) - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
	*Battuta: Well, the BP Carthage entry is quite informative, clearly separated from canon, so it's fine. However, what information is gained from adding BP tech descriptions for beams? I remember reading some story background in them, but apart from that, some technical talk. If you want them on the Wiki, I suggest creating a separate [[Blue Planet tech descriptions]] article. Snail: I don't have time to read the T-V War discussion history - here or at HLP - so apologies if I say something already said: canon and non-canon are clearly separated, and the means of separation (colors) is explained in clear English at the top, so personally I have no problem with that. If you want, I have no objections to trimming down the current article to canon info only, as long as you move Eisthmo's timeline to a separate article, for the sake of the preserving that information. Note, however, that the canon article will be ''very'' short. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 05:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)		*Battuta: Well, the BP Carthage entry is quite informative, clearly separated from canon, so it's fine. However, what information is gained from adding BP tech descriptions for beams? I remember reading some story background in them, but apart from that, some technical talk. If you want them on the Wiki, I suggest creating a separate [[Blue Planet tech descriptions]] article. Snail: I don't have time to read the T-V War discussion history - here or at HLP - so apologies if I say something already said: canon and non-canon are clearly separated, and the means of separation (colors) is explained in clear English at the top, so personally I have no problem with that. If you want, I have no objections to trimming down the current article to canon info only, as long as you move Eisthmo's timeline to a separate article, for the sake of the preserving that information. Note, however, that the canon article will be ''very'' short. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 05:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
			**I agree that the BP Carthage article is fine, and I agree that adding the BP tech descriptions to the beam articles would add very little. I think you misunderstand, though - I'm not saying I want them on the Wiki as part of the canon articles, I'm saying that they should be kept in separate articles. Similarly, I don't think the Legion entry should mix canon and ST:R material. There should be a separate Legion (ST:R) article. Otherwise we'll end up with situations like the Colossus page describing every silly campaign where the GTVA builds 40 more of them and they're all covered in BFReds.[[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 12:20, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:52, 20 April 2012
Line 16:		Line 16:
	**You're right, it does, but I'm just worried about articles that mix canon material with non-canon stuff, even if clearly marked. For example, it'd be pretty irritating for every single FreeSpace 2 beam weapon to have a Blue Planet tech description in a red box. Or, in this example, for the GTD Carthage's entry in the FS2 ship list to have the Blue Planet entry included in a non-canon box. Maybe I'm jumping at shadows? [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 22:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		**You're right, it does, but I'm just worried about articles that mix canon material with non-canon stuff, even if clearly marked. For example, it'd be pretty irritating for every single FreeSpace 2 beam weapon to have a Blue Planet tech description in a red box. Or, in this example, for the GTD Carthage's entry in the FS2 ship list to have the Blue Planet entry included in a non-canon box. Maybe I'm jumping at shadows? [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 22:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
	***I'm with Battuta on separating canon and non-canon material. Apart from being a little distracting, it also encourages the behaviour of people like ITA Master (among others) who decide to go and add their non-canon stuff to canon pages. I also think we should seriously consider completely redoing articles like [[Terran-Vasudan War]] which are almost entirely made up of non-canon stuff, despite ostensibly covering a 'canon' subject. N.B. I remember having a hilariously awesome flamewar with Mobius over this very topic a while back. Good times. :) - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)		***I'm with Battuta on separating canon and non-canon material. Apart from being a little distracting, it also encourages the behaviour of people like ITA Master (among others) who decide to go and add their non-canon stuff to canon pages. I also think we should seriously consider completely redoing articles like [[Terran-Vasudan War]] which are almost entirely made up of non-canon stuff, despite ostensibly covering a 'canon' subject. N.B. I remember having a hilariously awesome flamewar with Mobius over this very topic a while back. Good times. :) - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
			*Battuta: Well, the BP Carthage entry is quite informative, clearly separated from canon, so it's fine. However, what information is gained from adding BP tech descriptions for beams? I remember reading some story background in them, but apart from that, some technical talk. If you want them on the Wiki, I suggest creating a separate [[Blue Planet tech descriptions]] article. Snail: I don't have time to read the T-V War discussion history - here or at HLP - so apologies if I say something already said: canon and non-canon are clearly separated, and the means of separation (colors) is explained in clear English at the top, so personally I have no problem with that. If you want, I have no objections to trimming down the current article to canon info only, as long as you move Eisthmo's timeline to a separate article, for the sake of the preserving that information. Note, however, that the canon article will be ''very'' short. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 05:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:54, 20 April 2012
Line 15:		Line 15:
	*Wait, the BP Carthage already has an article [[GTD Carthage (BP)\|here]]. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 16:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		*Wait, the BP Carthage already has an article [[GTD Carthage (BP)\|here]]. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 16:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
	**You're right, it does, but I'm just worried about articles that mix canon material with non-canon stuff, even if clearly marked. For example, it'd be pretty irritating for every single FreeSpace 2 beam weapon to have a Blue Planet tech description in a red box. Or, in this example, for the GTD Carthage's entry in the FS2 ship list to have the Blue Planet entry included in a non-canon box. Maybe I'm jumping at shadows? [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 22:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		**You're right, it does, but I'm just worried about articles that mix canon material with non-canon stuff, even if clearly marked. For example, it'd be pretty irritating for every single FreeSpace 2 beam weapon to have a Blue Planet tech description in a red box. Or, in this example, for the GTD Carthage's entry in the FS2 ship list to have the Blue Planet entry included in a non-canon box. Maybe I'm jumping at shadows? [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 22:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
			***I'm with Battuta on separating canon and non-canon material. Apart from being a little distracting, it also encourages the behaviour of people like ITA Master (among others) who decide to go and add their non-canon stuff to canon pages. I also think we should seriously consider completely redoing articles like [[Terran-Vasudan War]] which are almost entirely made up of non-canon stuff, despite ostensibly covering a 'canon' subject. N.B. I remember having a hilariously awesome flamewar with Mobius over this very topic a while back. Good times. :) - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:07, 19 April 2012
Line 14:		Line 14:
	Setting aside the issue of where 'Legion' comes from anyway: cool, look, a mod note on a canon article! Can I go add a Blue Planet box on the Carthage? (I don't think this is a good idea or a good precedent to set.) [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		Setting aside the issue of where 'Legion' comes from anyway: cool, look, a mod note on a canon article! Can I go add a Blue Planet box on the Carthage? (I don't think this is a good idea or a good precedent to set.) [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
	*Wait, the BP Carthage already has an article [[GTD Carthage (BP)\|here]]. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 16:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)		*Wait, the BP Carthage already has an article [[GTD Carthage (BP)\|here]]. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 16:32, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
			**You're right, it does, but I'm just worried about articles that mix canon material with non-canon stuff, even if clearly marked. For example, it'd be pretty irritating for every single FreeSpace 2 beam weapon to have a Blue Planet tech description in a red box. Or, in this example, for the GTD Carthage's entry in the FS2 ship list to have the Blue Planet entry included in a non-canon box. Maybe I'm jumping at shadows? [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 22:07, 19 April 2012 (UTC)