Talk:Imperial Fists

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Warhammer 40,000, an attempt to expand, update, and improve all articles relating to Warhammer 40,000 on Wikipedia. You may edit this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives for the project.

Contents

[edit] Trying to avoid an edit war

Trying to avoid an edit war with an anon (or series of anon, but I doubt this) user(s), concerning two things

  1. The "Soul Drinkers" Chapter are NOT Second Founding, as per 3rd and 4th Edition Codex: Space Marines, and Index Astartes (Imperial Fists, Black Templars and Crimson Fists). This may have changed, and I will check Codex: Black Templars as soon as my brother gets it for Xmas, but I doubt it will have.
  2. The Imperial Fists#Notable Members list. Should it contain only members of the Chapter with rules (my view, and per all other similar lists), or should it include all members with a relatively sizeable mention in any of the fiction (apparently anon's view, but I am willing to stand corrected).

I will not touch the anon editions until the evening of Friday 23rd (East Coast Australia). If someone comes along with a solution, I will implement it. If not, I will remove the information, although I will be willing to re-add it if a decent case in favour is made. Saberwyn 09:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Soul Drinkers

The Soul Drinkers are a second founding chapter as stated in Ben Counter's novel Soul Drinker.

  • Does anyone yet know what the new Codex: Black Templars says? Personally, I'd be inclined to believe that as canon over a novel. Cheers --Pak21 21:09, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Codex Black Templars does mention the Soul Drinkers but only in name and doesn't give any details on them. The novels do go into a lot of detail about them being a second founding chapter Apemantus 20:10, 21 January 2006
    • Codex:Black Templars states that the Black Templars and Crimson Fists are the only Second Founding Chapters of the Imperial Fists, and this is supported by both the 3rd and 4th edition Space Marine codexes, and the various Index Astartes articles. No mention of the Soul Drinkers is made in relation to the events of the Secound Founding in any of these sources... I'd accept that they're a later founding, but believe that when the Codexes and novels contradict each other, Codex wins. I'm editing the article to reflect this. -- Saberwyn 03:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
    • However, in compensation, I've added a little bit concerning this discrepancy to the end of the article. -- Saberwyn 03:27, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
      • Soul Drinkers should be given their own article so their taint can be removed from the Imperial Fists' page. I don't care what the Black Library publishers/staff says, one writer should not be able to override a decade or more of established canon: The Imperial Fists Successors were the Black Templars and Crimson Fists, that's it.The list of second founding chapters is finite and until the Soul Drinkers show up on the Space marine Founding legions chart (you know the one that lists the Primarch, Homeworld and Second founding legions, that has remained unchanged for as long as I can remember) then all these Soul Drinker contradictions belong elsewhere. The Imperial Fists page should be about the Imperial Fists, not the Soul Drinkers.--Jesse 07:22, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
      • This is true, but until that article comes into existance, this is the only mention on wikepedia of the soul drinkers concerning their origin.
      • in addition; it is not 200% necessary for a chapter to sprout from the second founding, since the age of apostasy was much later. Indeed, cannon states that the Astartes are past the 26th founding.

[edit] Notable characters

Should included any characters mentioned by Games Workshop (including those mentioned in fiction) not just ones with rules as other may wish to see this. I find people who view these pages come to find as much oficial information as they can. just because one or two people don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't be shown.

  • Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a reference book. While there may be some people who want lots of names of 40K characters, there are many others who aren't hardcore players, and are coming here for a "good read", and will actually be put off by that kind of thing. No, I don't have a source for this, but then neither do you... Cheers --Pak21 21:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notable characters 2

I have proposed a guideline for character notablity within Warhammer 40,000 articles which I believe may effect the listings on this page. Please see the proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Warhammer 40,000/Notability and comment. Cheers --Pak21 10:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

We have now agreed some guidelines, and I believe that all the characters mentioned on this page except Captain Lysander do not meet any of the criteria specified. If you believe any of them do, please give the reasons here. (If you wish to discuss changes to the guidelines, please do this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Warhammer 40,000/Notability). Cheers --Pak21 10:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notable Character 3

Chapter Master Vladimir Pugh, Chaplain Lo Chang and Librarian Franz Grenstein are missing. These three are the most notable Imperal Fists character, as stated in Index Astartes vol II. --87.3.100.124 11:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

  • According to the consensus developed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Warhammer 40,000/Notability, these characters would not receive information within the article, as they have no rules, no special character miniature, and do not feature in a computer game or multiple Black Library novels. They are notable in the context of the 40k universe, but from the external point of view you and I have as players, they are just names put to roles for the sake of having them. -- Saberwyn 11:13, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

-It is my personal opinion that not including a Chapter Master Vladimir Pugh as a "notable Character" is absolute lunacy; there is no other word. Since when did Wikipedia cease being an Encyclopaedia and become a rule book? He has been mentioned in Index Astartes AND Space Marine by Ian Watson. Windigo 216: Imperial Fist for 13 years and running. --Jesse 11:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

You are correct.. Pugh is 'mentioned' in IA. I do not have access to the IA article to make a definite statement, but to my recollection, that mention was at most two small paragraphs in a small sidebox. Is Pugh the primary character in Space Marine, or is he only mentioned because he is the Chapter's leader? If he is the main focus of the novel, I would consider bending the guidelines to include him, but if he's only a background character, he has had a minimal impact on the game and work of fiction that is Warhammer 40,000, and thus should not be included. But then again, that's my view on the subject. -- saberwyn 11:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
What saberwyn said, plus Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information: including absolutely everything on a subject is not encyclopedic. On a more constructive note, rather than simply advocating the inclusion of a character from your personal favourite chapter, if you have any suggestions as to how the notability guidelines should be amended, please discuss them on the talk page there. Cheers --Pak21 12:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

--Jesse 20:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

This is not simply a matter of "advocating the inclusion of a character from my personal favourite chapter". If that was the case I would choose Captain Eshara from the book "Storm of Iron". I am advocating Pugh because he is the Chapter Master. Every Space marine article should include their current Chapter Master as it is valuable information. That is what Wiki provides, does it not? Valuable information? Chapter Masters should take priority over even characters with official rules; they are the most important individual in a Space Marine Chapter and must be included or else the article is not complete. Pugh, Tu'shan, Seth..the list goes on. Not including the current (41st millenium) Chapter Master just makes no sense.--Jesse 15:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The question I'd ask is who is this "valuable information" to? People will either know who Pugh is already (in which case it's not valuable to have it here), or they won't know it, in which case, they won't care. Pugh doesn't affect the game or the universe as we view it from our players' perspective at all. Anyway, if you're seriously proposing a change to the guidelines, you'll want to do this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Warhammer 40,000/Notability rather than here. Cheers --Pak21 15:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Read what I wrote carefully please. It is not just Pugh who should be included, but all Chapter Masters! Anyone interested in learning about a chapter should know who the Chapter Master is. It is valuable information indeed. And to say that Pugh doesn't affect the Warhammer 40k Universe is sheer lunacy. A Chapter Master is one of the most powerful individuals in the Imperium and can decide the fate of worlds. Numerous Chapter masters (such as the ones that are missing) will damn well affect the universe in a massive way as they each command 1000+ Space marines for a total of 1 million+ marines. Chapter Master should be a heading just like "Appearance" or "Combat Doctrine" in every space marine chapter wiki article.--Jesse 20:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Pugh does not significantly affect the 40k universe from the player point of view. The criteria has been designed so that the characters who affect people playing the games take precedence. If you think this should be changed, strike up a discussion at the inclusion guidelines, and let a few more 40k contributors hear your voice. -- saberwyn 01:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Position of Pugh

A couple of points:

1) Pugh is not found in the Space Marines codex, but this is not really relevant, since the vast majority of special characters found in this work are ultramarines. It only includes a smattering of characters from other chapters (and none at all from chapters with their own sub-codexes [my degree has a history major, and I shudder involuntary whenever I write "codexes" instead of "codices", but I digress . .  :)].

2) On the other hand, he would be described as a major background character in the book "Space Marine" by Ian Watson (1993). He is found on pages 61, 139, 140, 205 and mentioned on page 79 (in context of the description of his decision to have his taste buds removed) and 211 (in further discussion of this decision).

3) Commander Pugh was also mentioned briefly on the web page as recently as 2002. Since then, much of the background information on Space Marine chapters has been removed, as the website has focussed more on the hobby side of WH40K. This does not mean that any of the information contained therein is invalid.

4) You say that too much information could turn off one who is looking for information. I agree - but since it is in a clearly marked sub-area, I would hardly think that a list of characters who were worthy of note constituted too much information. In any case, it depends greatly on how that information is presented - if it's a list of rules and stats, it will be inaccessible. If it is interesting stories and character information, it will be totally accessible and interesting.

5) If we are to be consistent, we must define what constitutes "noteworthy."

  • Rank? Lord Pugh wins hands down, followed by Lo Chang and Librarian Grenzstein. Next come the unnamed chaplains and librarians in "Space Marine," and in Watson's later books we know that Lexandro D'Arquebus became a Captain, meaning that he is equal to Captain Lysander.
  • Significance in canon? Lexandro D'Arquebus wins this time, followed by his brothers Yeremi and Biff. All other Imperial Fists haveonly minor roles, but the most frequently mentioned fist apart from the above is Sergeant Juron.
  • Statlines? Well, finally Lysander rates a mention; but if you've never been to the 40k universe before, do you care if a character has a statline or not? Perhaps the existence of a specially designed model may be a part of the call, but I submit that this would eliminate a number of better known characters (including the Emperor!).

By all these arguments, if we include Lysander we must at least include Pugh and Lexandro. Doing otherwise would be inconsistent.


I agree with Pugh, Lex and Lysander being notable Characters, all for different reasons, but the rest are pretty minor and don't have any business being on this page, in my opinion.--Jesse 12:10, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way, just so everyone knows - my adding of the characters from Space Marine was not an act of rebellion. I just didn't think to read the Talk page first - my bad! I should have known better, but I just thought "Hey, they don't know as much as me. Well, I can fix that . . :)"Johno 16:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chapter Master straw poll

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Warhammer 40,000/Notability#Chapter Master straw poll for a poll on whether to include Chapter Masters in the list of notable characters for every Space Marine chapter. --Pak21 10:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Iron Cage: IF version

I don't find it very appropriate that the Iron Cage incident on the Imperial Fists Chapet's page is linked to the Iron Warrior page, and thus the IW version of events. The Iron Warriors account of the Iron Cage is vastly different from the Imperial Fists version. (This is intentional, as they were both written by the same author, Pete Haines, yet vastly different.) The Iron Warriors say they massacred, the Imperial Fists say they endured; naturally it was a brutal stalemate. Either way, it is my firm opinion that the Iron Cage on the Imperial Fists Chapter's page should be their story, not that of the Iron Warriors. So lets change it.--Jesse 13:42, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:WAF says it should be an out-of-universe view, not the view of either in-universe entity. --Pak21 13:55, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough, but that doesn't really solve the problem. In fact, that only expands the problem and makes my point about the link to the Iron Warriors version more valid. To my knowledge, there is no "out-of-universe" view of the Iron Cage, only the two detailed and rather different accounts printed in IA: IW and IA: IF. The IW wiki article contains, almost word for word, their account from IA and is most definitely not an "out-of-universe" view. --Jesse 11:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I have to agree with Jesse the Iron Cage incident should be told from the IF point of view and not from the IW, there is no out-of-universe view, the IF version is vastly different and as such their side of the story should be told as it gives a different insight as to why they went to fight the IW (They would enter the fight as a legion and emerge reborn as a chapter)--Apemantus 10:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Fate of Rogal Dorn

I read this in the current article: "However, this contradicts older material which states that his body was recovered and that Dorn's entire skeleton is now in display outside the Hall of Heroes outside the Emperor's Throne Room on Terra.[2]"

Is it just me? Or is this contributor mistaking the skeletal remains of Rogal Dorn for The Column of Glory outside the Emperor's Throne Room? Be it his hand, or his entire skeleton, either way Rogal Dorn's remains are on the Phalanx. I'll need to find the page in Space Marine, but I remember Dorn's remains being in the Reclusiam of the IF fortress monastery, not Terra. The Column of Glory is a massive pillar outside the Emperor's Throne room which is decorated with Imperial Fist and White Scar armour to commemerate their defence of the Imperial Palace. I will be adding/changing this shortly if no one disagrees or proves me wrong.--Jesse 12:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Pages 74- 76 in 'Space Marine' details very clearly that the Primarch's body and fists are aboard Phalanx,--Apemantus 10:53, 10 November 2006

[edit] Ultramarines

Do the Imperial Fists follow the exact structure as the Ultramarines do? i.e. no "special companies" like the Death Company and Ravenwing, 1st company is veteran company, 2nd to 5th companies are battle companies...etc. GoldDragon 00:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

For the most part the Imperial Fists follow the same structure as the Ultramarines. The only major differences are in their apprearance, customs and methods of warfare (ie: red veteran stripes, Terran sword duels and siege/urban warfare experts) Structuraly they are the same. They are a Codex chapter through and through.--Jesse 12:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notable Members

Ok, i just noticed that there seems to be a lot of members in the notable section who probably dont meet the standards required, could anyone who might be able to tell the difference for imperial fists characters take a look at this? Lowris 17:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC) The characters I have seen seemed to have been up to snuff. This seems to have been quite the bone of contention. Which does it look like to you? ChonkE (talk) 09:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Imperialfists.gif

Image:Imperialfists.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)