Talk:The Black Library Events Anthology (2018/19)

Source

The source is not reliable and does not give the information shown on the page. Bobmath (talk) 10:28, 25 June 2019 (MDT)

It's true. But I when I created this article I was sure that in a few months at least some other official source would appear on BL site or Warhammer-Community, so I can add the more reliable source. At the moment - I do not know how to improve this article better. Perhaps there will never be another source, although this Anthology exists and should somehow be reflected in Lexicanum. For the most part, this is one of the problems of BL, which sometimes do not show their products anywhere though they (the products) still exist.--Darkelf77 (talk) 11:03, 25 June 2019 (MDT)

So, what's the policy on sourcing these days? Is it ok to post unsourced content if you think it might be confirmed at some unspecified point in the future? Bobmath (talk) 12:42, 25 June 2019 (MDT)

After Inquisitor decides (I asked him about it, but he is still offline) the fate of this article will be finally decided. It is mostly possible that it will be deleted.--Darkelf77 (talk) 14:07, 25 June 2019 (MDT)

Does this site have any rules at all, or is it all run at the whim of one bureaucrat? Bobmath (talk) 14:58, 25 June 2019 (MDT)

There are rules, but some of them may be changed especially if other participants have their own opinion and want to change certain features. On the other hand, other adepts who did not participate in this project from the very beginning of its appearance may be mistaken in certain main points, so the 'oldest' of adepts may be asked about the decision.--Darkelf77 (talk) 15:26, 25 June 2019 (MDT)

This is the best I could find, https://twitter.com/blacklibrarium/status/1058433724071755776

In my opinion the picture of the back cover seems reliable.--Ashendant (talk) 15:38, 25 June 2019 (MDT)

covers of the actual book for summary descriptions are reliable, back in the day they were the only source available for a plot overview. Nobody is going to fabricate an artificial book and cover with it just to insert false information. This isn’t the NSA it’s a 40k wiki. Tweets and such have been sued as sources in the past and anything published by GW is an appropriate source. Limited edition event only stuff often is hard to get so the bare minimum sources are to be expected. The only issue with this is improper citations. Harriticus (talk) 15:45, 25 June 2019 (MDT)

Ten points to Harriticus for common sense. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 03:30, 26 June 2019 (MDT)

In any case one should consider securing such source image privately or even here in the system, as they tend to evaporate over the years. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 03:31, 26 June 2019 (MDT)

If you mean the second one (with the list of stories), I think it would be better to just add it to the article as an image.--Darkelf77 (talk) 04:02, 26 June 2019 (MDT)

I don't think that would look good. Why not upload it here and link to it if somebody wants to check? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 04:10, 26 June 2019 (MDT)

Therefore, we must decide how it will be better:

• 1) Leave this article as it is now (source 1a contains a picture itself uploaded on Lexicanum);
• 2) Transfer the picture here, and also put a link from the article (from the paragraph with the list of stories) to this page, for example: See Talkpage or something;
• 3) Add a picture to the main article (as I suggested). I do not insist.

Actually, any option is suitable for me, if only this article remains to exist, with an indication of the list of stories included in the anthology.--Darkelf77 (talk) 04:54, 26 June 2019 (MDT)