User talk:60.51.124.85

Welcome, 60.51.124.85, to BattleIntelligence!

Thank you for your contributions; you seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the army of BattleTech Editors! If you need help formatting the pages visit the manual of style. For general questions go to the Help section or the FAQ. If you can't find your answer there, please ask an Admin. If you have any more questions after that, feel free to ask me directly on my user talk page.

---

Additional tips

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the wiki:

• For policies and guidelines, see The Five Pillars of BattleIntelligence.
• If you want to play around with your new wiki skills, the Sandbox is for you. Don't worry: you won't break anything. A great resource for printing out is the Wiki Cheat Sheet.
• Consider registering at the site. That way, you'll get name recognition and respect for the effort you put in here.
• Introduce yourself at the new user log.
• In your Preferences, under the edit tab, check Add pages I create to my watchlist and Add pages I edit to my watchlist, so that you can see how your efforts have affected the community. Check back on each visit by clicking on my watchlist.
• If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random button in the sidebar, or check out the List of Wanted Pages. Or even go to Special Pages to see what weird stuff is actually tracked by this wiki.
• Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) (even if you choose not to register); this will automatically identify you from other posters and provide the date/time of the post.

*******Be Bold*******

You can find me at my user page or talk page for any questions. Happy editing, and we'll see ya 'round.

--Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Crecent Hawks

Hello. I recently reverted some of your changes in the Crescent Hawks‎‎ article for several reasons, primarily because they indicated it was being written from an assuming perspective, rather than as factual (with the citations needed to back up the facts). Specifically, you stated that you felt an aspect of the game (from which the material had been derived from) was probably in error. However, this is not actually known nor agreed upon by any official source. At best, the issue would have been more appropriately raised on the articles talk page (where there has actually been some rather involved discussions previously). Or, if there was strong evidence that a mistake had been made (and was strongly considered to be, via consenus), a note could have been added to the article explaining this, thereby allowing the reader to decide for himself as to what validity the debate had. On a second note, Frabby, a fellow editor, has addressed your specific concerns regarding the merc status of the unit on the same talk page. I would urge you to take part in this current discussion, so that your factual views can influence the consensus. Thank you. --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 11:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)