Talk:Iron Warriors
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Re: Cleanup
- I'm waiting for a decision to be reached on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Perturabo before I have a go at this one. I'm slowly going through various Warhammer 40K articles and giving them a good polish (Have a look at Space Wolves or Second Founding for examples. Saberwyn 10:23, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Done! Saberwyn 02:25, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Possible copyvio
The "Red Elf" external link from this page leads to a page whose text is very similar to this one. Does anyone know if this is a Wikipedia copyvio or a uncredited copy of Wikipedia information? Cheers --Pak21 15:32, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Battle cry
whoever keeps changing the battlecry to none known please stop as the Iron warriors battle cry is Iron within, Iron without and I'm gettting tired of always having to fix it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.135.116.244 (talk • contribs).
- Perhaps it would be more likely to remain if the information were verifiable via citation from a reliable source. Cheers --Pak21 08:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
UK WD274 page 20 features Pete Haines Iron Warrior army the article's title is Iron within, Iron without!
[edit] Pale Skin
They retain their Primarch's cold intelligence, paranoia, pale skin and dark eyes, and are noted for a preference for technological methods.
Perturabo, the Primarch had very dark skin, because of this, he was adopted by the Olympians, they were fascinated by him. So someone should change that. --ቢትወደድ 12:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Unsubstantiated Opinion?
Having such possibilities sets the Iron Warriors army a lot of steps above other Chaos armies. The common combination of a Daemon Prince leading 9 Obliterators, 2 Troops (minimum requirement), 3 Predator Tanks and 1 Basilisk is probably the reason under the statement "Iron warriors are the most powerful army in the whole 40k tabletop universe".
This doesn't look like something you'd find in an encyclopedia. Looks more like a personal opinion. Should this be changed?Oderic 11:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, I've removed it, since there were no objections.Oderic 13:37, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Changes in the new codex
I've added a small preface to the last section on how it is no longer possible to do an Iron Warriors army the way one would have since Gav Thorpe's holocaust of a new Codex, though I've avoided mentioning any specifics (Obliterators now not 0-1, no more Basilisks etc). |Fuji606 12:30 UTC 6th Sept 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuji606 (talk • contribs) 11:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- I'm not sure, but I think we should remove the part about the Basilisk, since you can't field em now anyway, plus it won't reveal anything from the Codex, since we won't be saying anything anyway. 172.203.105.159 18:50, 20 September 2007 (UTC)