Talk:Warhammer 40,000/archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This is an archive of the discussions held on the Warhammer 40,000 talk page between the article's creation sometime in 2004, and the 1st December 2005. All discussions located here were inactive at this time.

The current talk page can be found at Talk:Warhammer 40,000. Please start new discussions there.

BEGIN ARCHIVE

Improving this article

Think I'll dig out my old codexes, gets all nostalgic (and remember how much money I spent on all this) and improve these articles! -- Sam

Necrons

"the Nekrons, whose ships are clearly based on the Goa'uld ones from Stargate"

Doesn't WH40K predate Stargate? Ausir 23:20, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes it does but the Necrons are a new invention, they didn't have them in 'my day'.

Does anyone know when exactly were the Necrons introduced? Before or after SG1? I also think that the similarities to Goa'uld are because the Necrons are partly based on the Warhammer Fantasy Egyptian-themed undead of Khemri. Ausir 10:50, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Necrons aren't new, they have been a minor species with special edition models for many years, its only in the last 5 years or so they have became a semi-major species. They are not copied from Stargate at all, I'll agree with they both copy from Egyptians. If you want to accuse W40k from copying off stargate you may as well go change all the starcraft and warcraft articles to insults about how much they copied warhammer --Josquius 12:07, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

the necrons came out sometime between the last edition and current edition rulebooks

Possible copyvio

Chaos Space Marines and The Lost and the Damned both were copied verbatim from games-workshop.com (since replaced by stubs). Maybe someone who knows about Warhammer could go through the related articles to see if there's more of these around? Rvollmert 08:36, 2004 Aug 20 (UTC)

Warhammer 40,000 and Starcraft

I removed the following text from the article:

The popular computer game StarCraft was originally a Warhammer 40K game, but Games Workshop decided that they had taken too long and cancelled the contract, making blizzard change it.

I Googled and found nothing about that. Can anybody provide some evidence confirming or denying this? xDCDx 19:51, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It was just largely inspired by (not to say ripped off) WH40K, just like WarCraft was inspired by Warhammer Fantasy. Ausir 00:38, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with that, but saying Blizzard was going to make a Warhammer 40,000 game rather than StarCraft is a whole different matter. xDCDx 01:12, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Historical species, sideshow species, timeline, etc...

Where does the basis for all that come from? I have never heard anything about them (except the old ones/slann but that is just with fantasy I have heard of them). For the space rats in particular I'm certain there is no such thing, I went and made my own space skaven army many years ago and looked into the existance of space skaven a lot whilst I did this. Also the timeline- why is there just a link to some geocities site? Is that site owned by the editor of the article by any chance? This article has changed a lot since I looked in, maybe not for the better.

The minor species come from the contents of the books of the black library and the codices. Please don't think you know all about 40k. If you haven't heard about the hrud please make a google search, they are part of the fluff. ~ Jonus
As you might have seen there is a point in the todo list that says that a timeline for wikipedia has to be written. ~ Jonus

What 'codices'? I don't think I know everything about it kid I would just like directions to where on Earth all that came from, I have read a lot of the fluff and none of that rings any sorts of bells.

My point about the timeline was why does it just link to a geocities site. Why isn't there a timeline on the page if there needs to be one. --Josquius 21:00, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

'cause you haven't written it yet. Be Bold! -- Metahacker 02:07, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"Other" races

I'm thinking the stuff like Necrontyr and the stuff attached to various races, but not having their own actual army(outside of conversions) should probably not be mentioned alongside the "Army" races in the listings. Those merely connected to the major races can be given their links in that race's own article.

I think that if anything should be changed is the headline Armies to something like factions. Remember that the paragraph of armies is written under the point of view of background. ~ Jonus

About eldar

Maybe the eldar should be the root of all links to the factions of eldar, because before the awakening of she who thirsts there was only one eldar faction.

The assorted Eldar pages were basically a mess of empty stubs. I've gone through and compiled all the information into the main page of Eldar because there frankly isn't enough about the Exodites and Pirates to warrant a whole entry on them. I'm changing the link in this article to account for that. If anyone thinks there is enough material for the Exodites to have their own section, feel free to write it! -- HJC, 17th March 2005, 15:36 GMT

Referring to the recent edit by anonymous, is there really any reason that the Dark Eldar should have a section describing them when none of the other races do? It seems a little out of place, given that many of the older (in game terms) races with much more written about them don't. I generally think information should be restricted to another page (if that race has one already). Race information on this page, if needed, should really be kept minimal. I'd recommend rolling back the version, but I won't do that without discussion. -- HJC, 19:35 EST, 12th May 2005.

In warhammer 40000 they are Orks ...

and in WH Fantasy they are called Orcs. They should be written the right way and they shouldn't be merged into one page, because the two races are only similar on the surface.

Agreed. They're actually "Space Orks" technically, are they not? Or has that terminology been abandoned? At any rate, the two are suspiciously similar, but the spelling difference, at least, should be maintained. Arrr, it's frustrating when comics and gaming companies change their minds and can't admit it.

I disagree - they are similar enough that they should both stay at Orc (Warhammer) - the spelling difference is explained in the article. If it were to be separated, a lot of it would have to be duplicated. Ausir 02:03, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

They should be seperate. If they are together then you may as well put the high elves and eldar together, dark elves and dark eldar etc...

Space Orks... I think this has been abandoned, I haven't read it for a while. Last I heard though space orks were one of the subsets of Orks so it could still be in use for a space faring clan --Josquius 18:17, 10 May 2005 (UTC)=

Dude, wtf

is it just me, or is this article just a really long substub? this needs major re-working. like, im about 2 secs away from deleteing the page and starting over. some1 with the codices needs to bust a move in here, rewrite all this. look at the D&D page. that is clear, crisp, to the point,And IMO is just as complex as WH40K. some1 needs to take initiative! BE BOLD! --Rey

I agree that it needs work, but I think the overall structure is good: the article should provide a good overview of the game experience and the storyline, and then give more detail for various races, etc. on their own pages. If you've got time and energy to work on this, go right ahead. -leigh (φθόγγος) 05:18, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

i would fix it, as i've got teh time, but i haven't teh codices required to. --Rey

I disagree that it should be deleted. The comperison to D&D is a bad one. D&D is mainly a ruleset. If something should happen to the wh40k main page then it's a restructuring, but i don't know what exactly should be done.--Jonus 13:09, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

the comparison was to the order of the page. everything is laid out in a non-list, easy to read format, with clear descriptions and information. look, even teh moderators are telling us to merge pages and clear this up. i had to link to 3 pages before i got a foggy veiw of the praetors and the space marines. oh well, i suppose that a little reasearch should help me figure out to fix this. --Rey

i suppose i should apologize for threatening to delete pages. . . sorry all --Rey

Ha, f00!§

personally, i feel happy 4 myself. in response to teh comments, i have gotten to work on this page by rediecting wh40k to this page. y4y! ill go have another soda now. !. . --Rey

Go Figure. . .

...I just bought the main Codex, about to bust a move and rewrite this page when i see that someone beat me to the punch. bravo. gj guys --Rey

Images

There are several images of miniatures in the some races pages (eldar, tau, necron, ...) that seem to look like gw stuff. I doubt it's a good idea to use them. As source a shop is given which is very onlikely to paint models. Bad idea. --Jonus 00:03, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well I talked with the admin and he said the images are the property of GW. I then sent Customer Service an e-mail and he gave me the Intellectual Property policy that GW has. I read it over and I can't see a problem with the images but if you find one I'll take them down. If it is ok I just have to tag the images becuase i'm not sure which one to use -Derktar 19:08, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC). You can read the IP policy here.

They are GW promotional images so I see no problem with using them. Its similar to the use of the image in Blackadder right? - Josquius

People who fight background & fluff

The WH 40K is under constant attack of people who think that background information shouldn't be on wikipedia. This is something that I couldn't disaggree more. All this requests for deletion and stuff. What's the point?

If you don't want information on for example what a "eye of terror", a Nicassar or an Old One is, then please don't read that page. More and more information is lost, e.g. info on Black Library is gone. --Jonus 14:03, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The black library page is still there... Or was there another page there before I made mine which was deleted by idiots? The only solution is to take it to the main discussion parts of the site (where they are I do not know though) and get admins to look into it -josquius

I changed something

Based on current rumors found on Warseer and Dakka forums I have changed the article to state that Black Templars and Tau are the next 2 codices to be released, not Black Templars and Eldar. uh, rumours are just that. a rumour this is an encycloepaedia, therefore it should only have FACTS.

Mind you, Black Templars is a definite, and they've put new minis together for the Tau, so it's a fairly accurate rumour. Saberwyn 10:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

The Ming?

I removed the link to the Ming from the minor races section, on the basis that it's a fan-made race and not a very well-known one at that. I think entries based on fanfiction are VFD-worthy. --Agamemnon2 08:39, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Its on AfD at the mo, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Ming (Warhammer 40,000). Saberwyn 09:56, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Codexes???

Someone changed the spelling of Codices into Codexes. Isn't the plural of codex codices? --Jonus 21:41, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

It's like hippopotami. Codicies is the correct plural, but I don't know which way to go for this article. Saberwyn 02:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

thehivenode.com - Link spamming?

Twice now in the past few days I've deleted the web link to [www.thehivenode.com] from the Links section, because, in my opinion, a forum of only fifty members should not be in that list, where the smallest forum link present is a mere 2000.

The guy who posts the link is on a dynamic IP, from the 88.106.**.*** range, so communicating with him is unlikely. The link's back again, and instead of fighting what could be classed as a edit war with this guy, I would like some advice as to how I would go about 1) stopping him, and 2) making it clear that his link does not belong here.

Or does it belong here, and am I just being an idiot? Reply either here or on my talk page. Saberwyn 11:45, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

i dont see why not, just because a site is small doesnt mean it sholdnt be listed —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.106.54.47 (talk • contribs).

Because policy states that Wikipedia is not a link list. --Pak21 11:27, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

story

Can someone tell me the story to the whole Warhammer 40000 universe?

Pece Kocovski 05:09, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

How old do you have to be

to like Warhammer 40000?

by the way, if you want to start a Warhammer 40k collection, is there somesort of starter kit, that also includes a paint kit?

Pece Kocovski 05:13, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Meaning of 40,000

Maybe you should explain what the 40.000 means, cause i dont know —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.224.202.152 (talk • contribs).

New Codicier from the Administratum

Hello, I’m a new user to Wikipedia, but I have been into Warhammer 40,000 for about ten years now. I am really excited about what I’m seeing here, as I have always wanted access to a compilation of 40k background and technical material. The background and concepts in 40k are what got me into 40k in the first place, but also because I have been trying to create a Role-playing system.

So I hope you find my additions interesting and informative, though I’m not familiar with using Wikipedia so some help would be appreciated. I have made additions to the Power Armour section in the Weapons, Equipment and Vehicles of the Imperium article so let me know what you think and what I need to do to do it properly. I will list where I gathered this information here, as I’m not sure where to put that either.

Praise be the Emperor

--Usiel 02:58, 29 November 2005 (UTC)Usiel

Answered over at Weapons, Equipment and Vehicles of the Imperium --Pak21 09:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Answewed at User's talk page. Saberwyn 09:31, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

END ARCHIVE