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

Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum talk:Accepted sources

From Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum
Revision as of 05:14, 6 January 2009 by Vindicta (talk | contribs) (Images)
Jump to: navigation, search

Black Industries/Fantasy Flight Games

Is the material from Dark Heresy (BI/FFG) considered canon? --Akaoz 10:40, 23 December 2008 (CET)

Yes. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum 11:25, 23 December 2008 (CET)

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)

Images

What about non-canonized images, such as fan concept art? Is that reviewed on a case-by-case basis, or is it just generally no? (Inclusion being "Here's a fan's concept of a member of the Lost and the Damned..." for example) --Rye 04:37, 6 January 2009 (CET)

As I understand it, any non-canon works of fiction, be it literature AND images, must be restricted to your user-pages.--Vindicta 06:14, 6 January 2009 (CET)