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

Category talk:Species and Factions

From Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum
Jump to: navigation, search

Hm, the Eldar factions can't stay this way we can either have 1 faction of eldar with 5 subfactions (corsair, dark, craftworld, exodite, harlequins) or 5 factions. Or maybe 2 factions (craftworld eldar, dark eldar) and a catch-all subfaction (other eldars), but I think that the first option is the best one. Argument.--Madness 16:24, 25 April 2008 (CEST)

Categories are under discussion in the higher echilons at the moment, but i'd agree with the first one. Hold off on the changes of eldar for now as its a fairly major area.Cheers--Jonru 16:29, 25 April 2008 (CEST)
Thought so. :) --Madness 18:26, 25 April 2008 (CEST)
I like the proposal of creating proper separate categories. However I have a big problem: the term "Craftworld Eldar". AFAIK the majority of novels, Codexes, GW websites simply don't use this term at all. The Eldar societies of the craftworlds are simply considered to be the Eldar in the general sense.
  • Yes, I know there is a (single) codex with that title.
  • I also know that in one or two novels the term is used, however the character in whose thoughts the term "Craftworld Eldar" appears is always a Dark Eldar.
  • I also know that the Dark Eldar are culturally closer the the old Eldar empire than the Eldar which fled to the craftworlds. So what?

The Eldar who fled to the Craftworlds are simply more numerous and they seem to have kept the name for themselves. To cut things short I agree with the propossed categories but rather propose the following: "Eldar", "Dark Eldar", "Harlequins", "Exodites", "Eldar Corsairs & Pirates" (I don't believe that there is any difference between Eldar pirates and corsairs). Rangers don't need a separate categories as they only appear in the normal Eldar craftworld society and are therefore a part of it. Irulan 00:48, 26 April 2008 (CEST)

The specification "craftworld eldar" comes out every time there is ambiguity, I read it many times on various codices, since the Rogue Trader era even! Eldar is the correct term for the biologic race, the faction of eldar who lives in craftworlds being the one who retained most of their original tradition just calls itself Eldar, as it mean them to be the only "true and original" but then again it'a ambiguous. We need to be able to clarify when it's the Eldar biospecie and when it's the Eldar society, also, Eldar pre-fall society is different from the post-fall (craftworld) Eldar society. So either we have Eldar (kin), Eldar, Eldar (pre-fall), categories or we go with Eldar, Craftworld Eldar, with simple "Eldar" being referred to history common to all the factions and biologic features.--Madness 10:11, 26 April 2008 (CEST)
Do we truly need a separate category for the "original/racial" Eldar? IMHO we do not truly need to be overly technical and hair-splitting here. Almost all the Codexes (and novels, websites, etc) use "Eldar" for the guys of the craftworlds (a single exception for Chris'sake). I simply think that the term "Craftworld Eldar" is overly technical, to much hair-splitting, and honestly simply lame to boot. "Eldar", "Dark Eldar", "Harlequins", "Exodites", "Eldar Corsairs & Pirates": five categories, no more, no less. I like this solution very much. Irulan 17:45, 26 April 2008 (CEST)
I have no idea of what you mean by hair splitting (not a native speaker, I'm italian) and yeah, it does sound annoying if you repeat "Craftworld eldar" in every place when you cite eldar, tho I don't see anything wrong with "craftworld " being prepended to some articles and category names. We're talking of a bunch of mentions, not too much of a hassle I think. --Madness 18:20, 26 April 2008 (CEST)