Talk:Planets of Warhammer 40,000

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] Creation of this page

I have created this page in order to merge the prior list of articles into one. I am going to work through and tidy it up and then redirect all those pages to here. -Localzuk (talk) 12:39, 7 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] References

I think it would be advisable to move all references to the end of the article and use the Footnotes referencing style. As it stands we have too many references sections - the citation guidelines state "it is sufficient to provide a "References" section at the end of the article". If we use the footnotes style of references, it will make the page more readable. -Localzuk (talk) 12:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, I'd say that we use Harvard-style references throughout the rest of 40k articles, so using footnotes here would seem slightly strange to me. Secondly, where do we put the footnotes? The references are essentially for each section, not for a specific statement in each section. One possible compromise: keep the separate references section, but use semicolon notation to indicate them, so they don't show up in the ToC? Cheers --Pak21 13:09, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
We should bulk up the references section. Since we have an ungodly list of planets here, it's a lot of work, so I'm proposing something like: Whenever anyone comes across some solid info regarding a planet, just insert a "ref" footnote (someone'll reformat it into the proper format if it isn't) describing which particular book/magazine/codex has the info. We should work towards legitimizing our Warhammer 40k presence here on WP with references. Saves us from AfDs & makes us look good compared to many other fan communities fighting for their universe's entries on WP. Shrumster 07:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picture of 40k Universe

I have it, with a note on all the planets and stuff. Want it added? Colonel Marksman 22:36, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Is it a copyright free image? -Localzuk (talk) 11:50, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

It is not. I just sent word asking for permission for use. I also asked for their references and sources on their site as well (e.g. 5,500+ word index on all planets mentioned from every Codex and rulebook with 122 planets and galactic objects--they "reference" all of these).

O.0 ... and I thought the Star Wars galaxy was huge! Colonel Marksman 16:02, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

  • If there is more than 122 celestial objects in the Warhammer40k galaxy in mention, then combining all the articles into one might not be the greatest thing in the world. Then again, we can pick out the ones of importance and their available information. Here's the site: http://www.darkmillennia.net/QuadrantMap_pages/GMapIndex2.htm
  • I could also draw it, but I doubt that's acceptable. ^ ^ Colonel Marksman 15:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

In one version of the rulebook, it states that there are ~1000 Chapters, with 1000 Marines each. It also states that there are more marines than Planets of the imperium, showing at least 10,000,000 Planets. So, yeah it pretty much beats starwars.

1,000,000 actually, but Star Wars has that beat if the EU is to be believed. ;-) --Falcorian (talk) 04:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
But thats only within the imperium. Theres also Tau,Ork Tyranid, Eldar, Chaos, Dark Eldar and Necron Plantets plus those that are neutral!
Ok, ok, you confused me with this 10,00,000 number! I guess you got it right. --Falcorian (talk) 04:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
What of this mighty image? CABAL 12:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Well, you forgot about Chapters with more than 1,000 Marines, like the Black Templar. Warhammer 40K beats Star Wars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.237.134 (talk) 20:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, to deal with a few concerns, I have some suggestions (some comical or lighthearted): We could have a page devouted to planets devoured by the Tyranids, which would remove probably a few thousand from the above list. Plus, not many of the planets were named. I would suggest the only planets used are the ones that are named in more than two sources. That would probably be the best. Also, if push comes to shove, there are always the segments. Here is another suggestion: have a page titled "planets in the eye of terror/maelstrom" and it just says "screw this, are you kidding me"? :) SanchiTachi 23:38, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Length of Article

I may have a solution for this article. Localzuk, talk with Saberwyn about merging the History of Imperial Guard page with Planets of Warhammer 40,000. I suggest that we take the information Saberwyn has on each special Imperial Guard regiment and your information on each homeworld for each of the regiments and merge them into their own, indepedent pages.

This would do good to size down the mountainous articles, and make access to specific information easier. We could also expand on these specified planets and regiments (or other suppliment armies, e.g. Space Marines) rather than force ourselves to shorten the information on each.

The "Warhammer 40,000 Project Team" so to speak is running a Conferation here. We're under one big federal agreement that "we are one", but each article goes on it's own. Colonel Marksman 18:22, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Candidate planets

Planets that I feel can be merged out of here, either into another article or a unique article of its own by drawing on additional material from History of the Imperial Guard are listed below: -- saberwyn

  • Catachan (unique with Jungle Fighters)
  • Fenris (merge to Space Wolves)
  • Nostramo (Merge to Night Lords)
  • Prospero (Merge to Thousand Sons)
  • Tanith (unique with First and Only) -- saberwyn 13:09, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mixed composition

This has the potential to be quite a useful and informative 40k article, but if we're dealing with upwards of 50 (?) planets we need to rationalise the current format quite drastically if it is to become comprehensive. Personally I would like to see it operating as a sort of index like the Space marine chapters page. Some worlds (eg. Catachan) are of marginal importance (except as case studies) and have considerable blocks of text, whereas others (eg. Cadia) are very important but have been reduced to a link to another article. Structure: For consistency and ease of reading it might be an idea to limit the size of each planet's text to 2-3 lines (perhaps 10 for very important planets) with a link to another article with more detail - be that a page on the planet itself (eg. Cadia) or a page in which the planet is featured (eg. Fenris). This would also enable us to increase the coverage without massively over-stretching the size of this page. Content: In keeping with the reduced structure the segements should be restricted to basics. Catachan has lots of detail on fauna and flora (needs reducing); Necromunda has a single one-word entry (needs increasing). The sections on categories of worlds (i.e. death world, agri world, hive world) should be put at the top (or bottom) and the rest should be ordered alphabetically. References: I think it might be better to move them to the end or it will get messy.

Anyway, I don't want to start moving things unless people would be happy with this approach. It will also need input from other people because I can only add planets for which I have reference material. Thoughts? Wiki-Ed 14:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

This does make a great deal of sense. We could put the 'Planatery Clasifications as a Topic, with each class as Sub-Topics. --Emperors Harbinger 02:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I've just done the first bit of this and refactored it into "Types of planet" and "Specific planets". Cheers --Pak21 09:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 'Nids and Deathworld

That part is based on the 4th Ed. 'Nid codex I believe. If someone wants to reference it it would be great (I don't own it, so I can't). --Falcorian (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crimson Storm?

Under the Kronus entry, there is mention of a new "Crimson Storm" Space Marine chapter. Is it canon? CABAL 20:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid I can't find any mention of that whatsoever in Dark Crusade, Winter Assault or any of the DOW novels - so i'm thinking fancraft. Invisible pyromanic leprechaun 19:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Closest related thing I can find is a story by the same name in the Feb '02 issue of "Inferno!". No mention of any such chapter or its founding. CABAL 20:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Missing Name

We have a planet with text but no name. Anyone have a clue to its name? XJDenton

[edit] Over-Linking

Apart from the suspect language used in this article (which I am attempting to at least improve), there seems to be an abundance of links for rather silly things: for example, linking agri-worlds mention of "farms" to the article on a farm - there seems to be no need at all to do this. However, I won't touch anything like that till I get some input. Furhtermore, there is a vast amount of data that needs referenced - any ideas? 86.141.17.127 23:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Terra

The article states it is the future of our Earth. Hoever, I believe, and descriptions of Terra and the rise of mankind in warhammer, that Terra is in fact the future version of the warhammer fantasy world. It would also support the creation of the Astronomican, which would have been the winds of chaos in the old world. 87.113.83.128 (talk) 14:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)