Meshwesh Keywords and Search Terms

[David Kuijt]

I suggested this in Vodnik's Cañari thread, but maybe it'll get more attention here: it would be nice if Cañari (with the tilde) found the relevant list - Meshwesh Americanizes the name as "Canari", and doesn't treat n and ñ as equivalent. So either add the Spanish version as a keyword, or get the search to strip out the diacritic.

Added. It'll take a while for the data to be propagated to Meshwesh, though.

[Andreas Johansson]

The Medieval Danish and Union of Kalmar, Viking, and Viking Raider lists ought have the "Scandinavian" keyword.

[David Kuijt]

The Medieval Danish and Union of Kalmar, Viking, and Viking Raider lists ought have the "Scandinavian" keyword.

They do in the master copy; I just checked. The pace of updates had massively slowed; it may be that the most recent version of the database hasn't been uploaded to Meshwesh yet. We'll do that soon.

[Andreas Johansson]

"Spanish" should find the Castile, Aragon, and Combined Spain lists. "Spain" should find Castile and Aragon as well as the various "Spanish" lists.

Is there, BTW, any logic to which lists get a country name, like "Castile", or an adjective, like "Feudal Spanish"?

The "Almohades" seem to be almost the only list with a plural noun for a name. (Well, I guess "Tuareg" is properly a plural too - singular "Targi" - but we happily use it as a singular and as an adjective in English.)

[David Kuijt]

"Spanish" should find the Castile, Aragon, and Combined Spain lists. "Spain" should find Castile and Aragon as well as the various "Spanish" lists.

Hm. I thought it was already set up that way. I'll check.

Is there, BTW, any logic to which lists get a country name, like "Castile", or an adjective, like "Feudal Spanish"?

Gamer logic? My logic? No logic at all?

Actually, it isn't very complicated. When the geo-political-chronological unit under discussion has a convenient specific label (like a single country name, or a rebellion or period of rulership dominated by a particular leader, or something like that) we try to use the specific label. When the geographic spread precludes that, or the chronological spread precludes that, or the political/personality unit is way too complicated for an easy specific label, we are forced to go general. Look at the 10 or so lists that are the basis for much of the Holy Roman Empire through the early and high Medieval period. As you know, the political map of the Germanies during that half-millenium is a continuously remixing paintsplatter modern art disaster. Finding good army list names for those is a nightmare.

With all that said, if you have suggestions for a better name for a particular army list, we'd be happy to listen to your feedback.

The "Almohades" seem to be almost the only list with a plural noun for a name. (Well, I guess "Tuareg" is properly a plural too - singular "Targi" - but we happily use it as a singular and as an adjective in English.)

You seem to have entirely too much time on your hands, Andreas. I mean that in a positive way. (my dissertation advisor, when he levied harsh criticism at me or other grad students, would always follow it with an awkward smile and say "I don't mean that in a bad way..." -- if his plan was to get out of consequences for being a dick, it never worked)

[Andreas Johansson]

Actually, it isn't very complicated. When the geo-political-chronological unit under discussion has a convenient specific label (like a single country name, or a rebellion or period of rulership dominated by a particular leader, or something like that) we try to use the specific label. When the geographic spread precludes that, or the chronological spread precludes that, or the political/personality unit is way too complicated for an easy specific label, we are forced to go general. Look at the 10 or so lists that are the basis for much of the Holy Roman Empire through the early and high Medieval period. As you know, the political map of the Germanies during that half-millenium is a continuously remixing paintsplatter modern art disaster. Finding good army list names for those is a nightmare.

I suspect my question was misunderstood; it was simply about the grammatical form of the names. You have "Castile" and "Feudal Spanish" - it would seem more consistent to have "Castile" and "Feudal Spain", or "Castilian" and "Feudal Spanish". Is there a reason some names go one way and some the other?

As for time on my hands, I did put "almost" there precisely because I didn't have the time to check if there's another list (well, behind the other one with "Almohades") with a (recognizably to the average wargamer) plural name.

[David Kuijt]

I suspect my question was misunderstood; it was simply about the grammatical form of the names. You have "Castile" and "Feudal Spanish" - it would seem more consistent to have "Castile" and "Feudal Spain", or "Castilian" and "Feudal Spanish". Is there a reason some names go one way and some the other?

We laid a trap, way way back, to see who would first ask about the inconsistency. You won! Woohoo! Sure took someone long enough. I think all the others totally forgot about that clever long-term trap.

Either that, or there is no reason. Maybe I was feeling adjectival at some points, and not at others...

As for time on my hands, I did put "almost" there precisely because I didn't have the time to check if there's another list (well, behind the other one with "Almohades") with a (recognizably to the average wargamer) plural name.

[Andreas Johansson]

Wouldn't hurt if "Persian" found the Safavid list (which incidentally is another one with a recognizably plural name).