Welcome to Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum! Log in and join the community.

Difference between revisions of "Talk:Arkan Confederates"

From Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 22: Line 22:
  
 
:::::::::::If it is an obvious mistake I would ''not'' even leave it in the official blurp in the novel article. The internal link will lead people to the correct page where a corresponding note should be placed. --[[User:Inquisitor S.|Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum]] ([[User talk:Inquisitor S.|talk]]) 10:49, 9 July 2019 (MDT)
 
:::::::::::If it is an obvious mistake I would ''not'' even leave it in the official blurp in the novel article. The internal link will lead people to the correct page where a corresponding note should be placed. --[[User:Inquisitor S.|Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum]] ([[User talk:Inquisitor S.|talk]]) 10:49, 9 July 2019 (MDT)
 +
 +
::::::::::::Agree.--[[User:Darkelf77|Darkelf77]] ([[User talk:Darkelf77|talk]]) 12:01, 9 July 2019 (MDT)

Revision as of 18:01, 9 July 2019

This page has the regiment's name spelled incorrectly; the correct overall name is "Arkan Confederates". Could the article be moved under the correct name? SkyeAuroline (talk) 19:14, 8 July 2019 (MDT)

Are you really sure? Just from the number of search results on Google it's 180 for "Arkan" but 1.420 for "Arkhan". No definitive proof, obviously, but enough to double-check. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 22:43, 8 July 2019 (MDT)
Even the official Black Library "blurp" spells them as "Arkhan Confederates": "In the jungles of the Dolorosa Coil, a coalition of alien tau and human deserters have waged war upon the Imperium for countless years. Fresh Imperial Guard forces from the Arkhan Confederates are sent in to break the stalemate and annihilate the xenos. But greater forces are at work, and the Confederates soon find themselves broken and scattered. As they fight a desperate guerrilla war, their only hope may lie in the hands of a disgraced commissar, hell-bent on revenge." --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 22:49, 8 July 2019 (MDT)
In the e-book of Fire Cast novel is also written "Arkan" everywhere. And never written "Arkhan". May be there are two variants depending of releases or something?--Darkelf77 (talk) 23:53, 8 July 2019 (MDT)
In the physical book of Fire Caste I own, it’s spelled “Arkhan” everywhere. KazilDarkeye (talk) 23:59, 8 July 2019 (MDT)
Thanks. So, there are two variants. Unfortunately it happens in books of Warhammer 40k... I think that now (to avoid misunderstandings), it is necessary to include both spellings in the article and indicate that Arkhan Confederates has a source on the website of BL and paper book, and Arkan Confederates are mentioned in the e-book. Just so that people do not get confused when they encounter the "wrong spelling" in their source. That's my opinion.--Darkelf77 (talk) 00:11, 9 July 2019 (MDT)
How dumb is that that the paper version spells it one way and the e-version another... --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 00:37, 9 July 2019 (MDT)
Lack of editors or just inattention to details may be.--Darkelf77 (talk) 01:01, 9 July 2019 (MDT)
Yes, but it should basically have been a simple copy/ paste job... I mean we have other cases where spelling mistakes have been carried over over 7 editions because GW just copies its own texts... --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 01:13, 9 July 2019 (MDT)
O.K. major embarrassment time here - I meant to write that my physical copy DOES say "Arkan", not "Arkhan". I am terribly sorry and in hindsight I should have written that when I wasn't in a hurry to get to work. I can also confirm that the back blurb of my copy also says Arkan, so it would appear to be a simple mistake on the Black Library website page. KazilDarkeye (talk) 08:38, 9 July 2019 (MDT)
Then Arkhan should be left only in the article about the story, where the Plot from the site of BL is stated. May be also with appropriate Note about this complication.--Darkelf77 (talk) 10:26, 9 July 2019 (MDT)
If it is an obvious mistake I would not even leave it in the official blurp in the novel article. The internal link will lead people to the correct page where a corresponding note should be placed. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 10:49, 9 July 2019 (MDT)
Agree.--Darkelf77 (talk) 12:01, 9 July 2019 (MDT)