What's new
  • If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
  • Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
  • 📅 May and June 2024 are YE 46.4 in the RP.

Approved Submission B7R-604 System

Zack

Zack

Inactive Member
Submission URL
https://stararmy.com/wiki/doku.php?id=system:b7r604
Submission Faction(s)
Submission Terms
  1. I agree
I have some free time / energy and I feel like cleaning up some of the USO pages. We've got a lot of good content but it isn't always in the right format since I'd rather be RPing than doing all the paperwork.

But I feel like paperwork now.

So I'm doing that.

Nothing really new here, just creating a system article to go with the combined planet/system article that I already have for the system.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This suggestion has been implemented. Votes are no longer accepted.
@Zack - would you mind adding the following (or something similar) to the article, please? It’s so that the system can be considered “industrialized” under the Military Buildup Limitations and thus contribute towards USO’s maximum fleet capacity.
  • USO has controlled the B7R-604 system since YE 40.
  • USO currently has a system-wide resource-claiming operation occurring in the B7R-604 system.
 
Last edited:
That's a little silly. Are we going to require star systems have explicit language saying what is in them or it doesn't count? That would be a perfect example of bad rules being implemented that make this whole experience less fun for everyone.
 
Dude, it's just a small edit. Please just make it OK? You can flavor it however you want, but the bottom line is that A) We have no evidence in here that the USO actually has mining operations in the system. B) We also have no evidence in RP that the USO has mining operations in the system.

Thusly it follows that until we have some indication that it does have those, we have no basis for the assumption that the system is industrialized.
 
I'd like to request the NTSE mods review this using the checklist and make sure that they follow the NTSE approval guide.

This is a stub article to bring things more in line with proper formatting, and its got all of the information that's needed for RP. This whole approval process should be simple.
 
They're telling you to do this so that it can fall in line with buildup limits. If it doesn't have an operation, then your ship-count may have to decrease. It doesn't have to be done, but there will be consequences so that Uso can fall within rules.
 
Hello! Let's see if this submission meets the requirements for inclusion in Star Army's lore...

[ X ] 1. The destination URL should be a page in the appropriate namespace and titled lower_case_with_underscores
[ / ] 2. The article is in the appropriate format and article template
[ X ] 3. The article follows our wiki style guidelines, including: No forced line breaks, text after each section header, etc.
[ X ] 4. The article is easily read and free of errors in spelling and grammar
[ / ] 5. Links to other wiki articles are present as appropriate
[ X ] 6. The article fits into the Star Army universe's space opera theme and technology levels
[ X ] 7. Images in the article are hosted on Star Army's wiki and sourced responsibly (contact Wes privately if there's a concern)
[ X ] 8. The article is original and doesn't contain copy-pasted content from other articles.
[ X ] 9. The article complies with Star Army's rules in terms of damage ratings, speed limits, etc.
[ X ] 10. The Faction Manager(s), if applicable, have posted approval for this article in this thread.

Here's some fixes this article still needs:

1. Go look at other system pages; specifically there's a two that come to mind in Nepleslia such as Freebeer, Delsauria (which was rather recent), and one of the best ones via Yamatai itself. You fail to provide any keynote information on the planet's states, assets in the system, and history for the system; these are trademarks of every type of system. This is why I linked 3 different "scales" of system pages to get the point across that this one should still provide more information.

2. Provide a claim date of USO's occupation; it's colonization is not the equivalent of when USO acquired it and should be specified as such. If it's not claimed, then you still need to specify the arrival of mining operations and such within the system.

3. The discussion clearly seems to be based around what USO does or doesn't have here; this needs to be clarified above anything else because it clearly has relations and concerns bridging it to other setting elements. I look forward to you working with other site members to clarify this, as we should be promoting cooperation versus aggravating fights. If you fail to try and make this step, then I will be forced to call in Staff for moderation purposes and overall may effect the outcome of this submission. I do not want any pointless arguing, finger-pointing, or name calling; this goes for everyone.

When these fixes are made, please post a reply here with a tag of my name.
 
Ok. Cool. This I can work with.

Yamatai is a heavy system article. Heavy AF. This system is a side area that we visit from time to time so it doesn't need to be that detailed so I'm going to ignore that example.

Freebeer and Delsauria are more in line with what I'm going for here as I really only care about the interesting stuff in the star system. I could easily adapt the B7R planet article to be a B7R system article and have it match one of these two examples pretty well in terms of content / amount of text /etc. The only problem with that is just "It doesn't follow the system template". If its ok to use Freebeer or Delsauria as a template and still have the article be approvable we should be good to go.

Is that ok @Legix
 
Zack said:
Ok. Cool. This I can work with.

Yamatai is a heavy system article. Heavy AF. This system is a side area that we visit from time to time so it doesn't need to be that detailed so I'm going to ignore that example.

Freebeer and Delsauria are more in line with what I'm going for here as I really only care about the interesting stuff in the star system. I could easily adapt the B7R planet article to be a B7R system article and have it match one of these two examples pretty well in terms of content / amount of text /etc. The only problem with that is just "It doesn't follow the system template". If its ok to use Freebeer or Delsauria as a template and still have the article be approvable we should be good to go.

Is that ok @Legix
Click to expand...
If you want to use them as a template, that's fine. The main reason I marked that is primarily because the submission itself did not fulfill the demands that the templates and basis of other systems does normally. I'm honestly a fan of us having a "standard" but not a template when it comes to information display and simply want this to fulfill its duty as every other system page does.

Until the changes are made, though, I will not be handing out any approvals or saying if that's fine; I want to see the work done and the discussion + dialogue had revolving around whatever issues others apparently see with this system. Saying that "This ensures you pass" is a dagger to the foot when these edits may not be the only legitimate thing that can be raised involving the approval of this.

TLDR: make the changes and then we'll see if anyone else will/can raise legitimate issues that hold it up. If not, then I will more than likely give this an approval stamp.
 
@Legix Changes made. Mostly this is just moving the planet article to the system article. Once approved and moved I'll see change the planet article to say 'See the system article'.
 
@Zack - Aren’t planet articles supposed to have different content from system articles, though?

Edit: I mean no offense, but I ask because, well, in my opinion the B7R-604 system article currently looks a lot more like something written via the planet template instead of the star system template.
 
There's a few new errors that popped up (such as a hyperlink redundancy word repitition with "the The 4th Great Elysian Empire), but I'll worry about fixing small things like that once we reach approval.

Problems / Changes Requested
The biggest problem I have now is you've basically removed information about the other elements within the system from the listing (other planets, system composition). That stuff should be on here primarily, with small descriptor snippets for the worlds even if they're boring "insert here"-type worlds. It can be in the table format you used before or simply listed in separate headers.

I'd like to re-confirm that the dates are accurate as you've used a lot of YE 39's; the current year is/was YE 40, so make sure that these are right and accurate to YE 39 being when they occurred.

Change "Cities" header to "Key Locations". This will clarify it to what it's meant to be; facilities and important things of note.

Bump "History" up into its own category and call it "System History". This history section should be used for the entire system; planetary detailing can be kept short-noted on the system page (such as "YE 20; colonized, YE 32: Mishhu pooped here in list format). If it currently still functions as planetary history, try to make the adjustments to make it for the system.

I'd also like for the "claim date" of USO to be in the very upper-most description. This section is generally used to relay ownership of systems, after all, as it's the "read this for the basic idea of what this page is" section. It helps people quickly grasp who owns a system, basically. It should still be repeated in the System History section; obviously it would just have more depth and explanation as to HOW they claimed it and all that jazz.

Explaining the Look/Template presentation (for everyone)
For the sake of brevity; if this is mostly the planet's article, then we need to see about removing the planet article or "freezing" it for now. If/when the system grows larger, this information can be moved back there; but the reason it looks like this (for people like @FrostJaeger), is because this is how System pages are generally styled if they only have one important planet. This is something seen from Delsauria's system page; it's perfectly fine to not have a separate planet page as you currently have/use a system page to accomplish that.

If/when the page grows, however, it may be asked that you create a new page and/or refurbish the planet page and hyperlink to it from the system page.

Let me know when you get these changes down and tag me again - it's definitely in a much better state now.
 
Similar to the Delsauria article, the other planets in the star system are 'uninteresting'. There are no military bases, space-squids, ancient civilizations, or life forms out there. It is just the normal collection of large-rocks you'd expect to see in a star system. If players want to explore or build on that later I'd expect them to start fleshing out the terrain then, but ultimately, B7R604 is the only planet that has RP going on and is the only one that is expected to be used in RP for the foreseeable future.

YE 39 is the correct year. The planet has appeared a few times in RPso far.

Changed cities to Key Locations

Changed History to System history. Not a whole lot to change or add here though but I did add a bit about YE 40.

Desauria doesn't have a claim date at the top, but I went ahead and added one for the USO anyways.


---

When the System article is approved, I think the planet-article is going to be cut down to 'just look at the system article' and a link.

@Legix
 
Would you mind adding in a mention of the “system-wide resource-claiming operation” I talked about here, @Zack? It’s necessary if you want the B7R-604 system to count towards the assets available to USO under the Military Buildup Limitations.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top