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

Difference between revisions of "Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum talk:Accepted sources"

From Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum
Jump to: navigation, search
(New section: Black Library)
(Black Library)
Line 10: Line 10:
  
 
My understanding as told to me by a close friend and devoted fan of Warhammer is that Black Library is not official, what is published in the novels in not always what happened in the fictional universe.--[[User:LordMilitant|LordMilitant]] 21:03, 26 October 2008 (CET)
 
My understanding as told to me by a close friend and devoted fan of Warhammer is that Black Library is not official, what is published in the novels in not always what happened in the fictional universe.--[[User:LordMilitant|LordMilitant]] 21:03, 26 October 2008 (CET)
 +
 +
:It doesn't really matter what friends tell us. Only stuff from official sources matters. And regarding the "canonicity" of BL these statements are somewhat conflicting as of late. For the time being BL stuff here is regarded as canon unless contradicted or retconned in a newer publication. Which of course happens all the time as GW does not know the meaning of the word "consistency" (not even within one publication). --[[User:Inquisitor S.|Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum]] 22:42, 26 October 2008 (CET)

Revision as of 21:42, 26 October 2008

-What is not canon-

I was just wondering what was once considered "canon" and what is now not. Given the rather confusing nature of Warhammer 40,000 canon, I think a clarification of what older stuff is no longer considered canon would help.

Thank you in advance.Imperator007 03:01, 17 September 2008 (CEST)

Black Library

My understanding as told to me by a close friend and devoted fan of Warhammer is that Black Library is not official, what is published in the novels in not always what happened in the fictional universe.--LordMilitant 21:03, 26 October 2008 (CET)

It doesn't really matter what friends tell us. Only stuff from official sources matters. And regarding the "canonicity" of BL these statements are somewhat conflicting as of late. For the time being BL stuff here is regarded as canon unless contradicted or retconned in a newer publication. Which of course happens all the time as GW does not know the meaning of the word "consistency" (not even within one publication). --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 22:42, 26 October 2008 (CET)