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

User:Jonru/Archive 2

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

Return to Jonru's User Page.
Return to Jonrus's User Talk Page

User Page

Sysop Nomination

Hi Jonru! We decided to nominate you the second SysOp of the English Wh40k Lexicanum. May your efforts let this wiki grow and prosper. But please do not forget that this wiki is one of four, which have to remain closely connected with each other - in this case especially with the German Wh40k Lexicanum, of course. So please discuss changes in structure and handling with the other ones - if things are changed, they should be changed everywhere. And have an eye for the things happening on the German wiki. May the Emperor's light shine upon our collaboration :) -Torwächter 14:06, 19 Aug 2005 (CEST)

I definitely supports this nomination. Jonru seems to have more time and committment to work on the wiki than me. But I'm staying around fixing things as well --Dalen 23:31, 3 Sep 2005 (CEST)
Jonru, you've been working your @ss off on this thing. Just wanted to say thanks

Congrats Jonru Bro. Redemption

IW Stuff

  • Remove all larger IW boxes
  • Find all multi-linking IWs
  • Sort how to do multi-linking IWs - use smaller linking boxes

Stuff to resolve

Eldar, how is it going to work...

  • The Eldar Civilisation - list of all non-military pages aka these
    • Eldar Society - Paths, list of factions aka craftworld (alaitoc etc.) and harlequins etc., the infinity circuit, hierarchy perhaps
    • Eldar Religion - all the gods plus ynnaed
    • Eldar Technology - includes non-military stuff like webway, wraithbone etc.
    • Eldar History - pre-fall, the fall, craftworlds (brief history)
    • Eldar Worlds - maiden worlds, crone worlds, exodite worlds etc. inc. moons

Imperial Guard, how is it going to work...

Baran needs doing.

Necron iw's to investigate:

Gauss Fluxannihilator
Gauss Partikel Peitsche
Sepulchre (needs to be made... copy 
Partikelbogen (Lightning Arc, needs to be cop... oop made, yes, made *nod*)
Portal (as the name suggests, the bfg portal, needs copy-making yes it does)
Pulsgenerator (star pulse generator, oh deary deary me that too needs making in a copying sort of sense)
Reaktive Hüllenpanzerung (different from necrodermis aparently, somehow, bfg makes a difference, more make-copying)
Reaperklasse (a ship i believe, copy-makage)
Stasisgruft (stasis chamber?)
Unsterblichkeit (Immortality???)

is there anything i can do to help with anything (eg making articles on the black lib stuff bigger?)

for novels like the gaunts ghosts, ciaphus cain and others, do you want a page for each book, or just a page per series?

User Discussion Page


Categories should be spelled like Category:Deathwatch (remove the colon in the beginning to actually categorize a page) --Dalen 12:48, 7 Aug 2005 (CEST)

Galaxy Maps

Hi Jonru: For many planets etc. we have already created galaxy maps, for example like this http://wh40k.lexicanum.de/wiki/Segmentum_Tempestus So you could have a look at the German Lexicanum for more maps. --Inquisitor S. 17:49, 12 Aug 2005 (CEST)

Every registered user can upload pictures in the Lexicanum, so the most simple way to get the maps to your articles would be to save them from the German Lexicanum (which should be no problem as the names are the same) and re-upload them to the English Lexicanum. I'm sorry, but it is not possible, to use them (via links) from the German one. If you have Adobe Photoshop (and know how to use it;)) you can also download the map at http://wh40k.lexicanum.de/wiki/Lexicanum:Galaktische_Karte and modify it to your own purposes before uploading it. --Inquisitor S. 18:25, 12 Aug 2005 (CEST)


Erm. wow, thanks :D I didnt see this coming! I will attempt to co-ordinate with the German 40K wiki, although it could be interesting as I dont speak any German. Here I come google translate... thanks again! I shall endever to put some stuff into the warhammer wiki, although I don't know anywhere near as much for that as I do for 40k. Yay! Cheers :D
Yeah you have been steam-rollered by your own commitment ;) Everybody at the German Wiki speaks English so no worries. Co-ordination mainly concerns administrative and formal aspects. In addition we also will have an eye on the progress here of course, so that from time to time there may be advice or ideas. Best regards --Inquisitor S. 16:05, 19 Aug 2005 (CEST)


Sorry but I need soime help to avoid Jonru to work too much. Could anyone explain me how to do paragraphs? Thx a lot

THX a lot ^^ I've made a little article for the defiler... If you're interested ^_^

==Disambig Category We have introduced the Category:Disambiguation in order to minimize the number of uncategorized pages. --Inquisitor S. 14:44, 14 Sep 2005 (CEST)

Uni Life

Hi, just like to say sorry for my lack of posting recently, i've just moved into my university hall and my course starts next week and everything is quite chaotic. I should be able to do a bit more but i've had to leave most of my 40k resources at home... --Jonru 10:59, 26 Sep 2005 (CEST)

Hobbes1012 for sysop

Jonru, could I help you in this project, further than contributions, I think it is an intresting idea and would like to play some part in it. For an example of my editing/writing, I expanded the space wolves organisation section, with the 3rd to second last paragraph, also wrote the long fangs page. --Hobbes1012 22:23 GMT 22 December 2005

As for 'more than contributions'. I would like to be able to help with the running and control of the project. --Hobbes1012 01:31 GMT 25 December 2005. Merry Christmas all.

Imperial Navy

Thank you for your kind words about the Imperial Navy work, I am using the rulebooks as a guide on my ramblings about them, aswell as my experience playing with the ship classes. Long live the retiribtution class :D --Hobbes1012 16:05 GMT 18 January 2006.


It would be really goos if you cited the sources of all the content you add. I think it's best to list it in italic at the bottom. As you add most pages here it would set a good example for others to follow. --Dalen 23:43, 16 Oct 2005 (CEST)


I deleted "Devistator" as it's actually "Devastator" in my opinion. --Inquisitor S. 17:23, 13 November 2005 (CET)

Technical Issues

As you already may have noticed the Lexicanum is experiencing some technical problems including for example defunct functions since its last update. We are sorry and of course try to get everything working. However this is (as far as we know) nothing too serious :) --Inquisitor S. 23:16, 22 November 2005 (CET)

Copyright Material

If you encounter copyrighted material like with the Krourk, please remove it, there's no sense in waiting for GW to make problems. Thx. --Inquisitor S. 19:24, 1 December 2005 (CET)

Outside Support

"*Also would it be ok if I asked the various forums i go on to put a link to us in an attempt to get more involvement? If they say yes I would put them on the main page as supporters? --Jonru 20:51, 13 January 2006 (CET)" Sorry, didn't notice this before. Yes, that's the way we define supporters: put a link/ banner up on their page. --Inquisitor S. 11:52, 16 January 2006 (CET)

Fire Hawks/LOTD

Dude, that is not a GW endorsed site and anything in it is unofficial (like technically we are). The LOTD is specifically written to be mysterious, and whilst it's fairly clear the Fire Hawks are the LOTD, in the same way as the Emperor will never die or be re-born, the tyranids will never wipe out the galaxy, a full STC will never be found, and nobody will ever conquer the galaxy, by the nature of the 40k universe, the LOTD will forever remain "mysterious" and thus can never be officially claimed to be the Fire Hawks. At the end of the day, you are the SysOp and I will defer to you, however I hope you understand the point I am making. In rather the same way as Cypher's mysterious sword is clearly the sword of Lion El'Jonson, it is officially a mystery.

Having read your last comment on my user space I did some more research mysefl and found this on the GW site:

"The examination of starship debris recovered in the Maran sub-sector suggests a link between the Legion of the Damned and the fate of the Fire Hawks Chapter. The Fire Hawks were declared Lost in the Warp in 983.M41, twenty years after the entire chapter set out for Crow's World on a counter-invasion mission against the Eldar. The Inquisition are unsurprisingly keen to discover if the Legion of the Damned and the Fire Hawks are in fact one and the same chapter, and if so, how they gained their mysterious and deadly abilities." -http://uk.games-workshop.com/spacemarines/cursed/2/

Request Page

No, at the moment there is no request page, but as it's a good idea, one will be created. Just thinking about where to post it. --Inquisitor S. 13:09, 22 January 2006 (CET)

See Requested Articles, already anounced in in the Portal. --Inquisitor S. 15:08, 22 January 2006 (CET)

I cannot edit the main page (for fairly obvious reasons) but would it be a good idea to put a link to the requests page on the main page? Then new visitors will be aware of it.--Squirrel 14:15, 22 January 2006 (GMT)

Jonru is just too fast for me. Ignore my last comment. --Squirrel 15:21, 22 January 2006 (CET)

Oh, awsome. This is wierd now, so I'm going to go. --Squirrel 15:22, 22 January 2006 (CET)

Templates on German Wiki

"Hi, could you give me a link to the templates used on the German Wiki, I have tried looking for them but it's hard enough to find them here let alone on the google translation of the site. I will then transfer them across and try to standardise some of the templates in use at the moment. Cheers --Jonru 19:43, 13 January 2006 (CET)"

Sorry again, didn't notice this before. Maybe you should write me an e-mail when such issues arise :)

Here's the link for the templates: http://wh40k.lexicanum.de/wiki/Lexicanum:Vorlagenbausteine If there are problems send me a notice. --Inquisitor S. 10:13, 24 January 2006 (CET)


There won't be a Kroot-Category for the time being, as they are not important, just another species categorized under " Other Alien Species and Factions". The Kroot-Category in the German Lexicanum was a previously undiscovered mistake, which has been corrected by now. --Inquisitor S. 16:44, 20 February 2006 (CET)

Temporary resignation

The Lexicanum is a hobby project, everybody does what he can and is willing to do and obviously sometimes more pressing issues arise. So good luck and hope to see you again :) --Inquisitor S. 15:53, 23 February 2006 (CET)

About footnotes and endnotes

Is there no way to have the notes referencing sources to be formatted like they are on Wikipedia - this does use the same code, after all. The bold numbers in brackets just seem a bit untidy, I think I'll look into it. Klarsh Voxiz 23:24, 5 March 2006 (CET)

This would be an example of what I mean. Look a bit fiddly to code, but I'm sure we could gradually work it in eventually. Klarsh Voxiz 23:37, 5 March 2006 (CET)

Yeah, I had a try with those references as well, but I couldn't get it to work either - and when I looked at the code, I realised I don't understand the ones we have now, either. Ah well, you win some, you lose some. Klarsh Voxiz 00:01, 6 March 2006 (CET)

What is this <ref> Tag for? I mean what's the difference to internal links? --Inquisitor S. 00:36, 6 March 2006 (CET)


Would using scans from White Dwarf violate any copyright laws, or would it be alright to use images from the magazine in some articles? Klarsh Voxiz 22:49, 6 March 2006 (CET)

Okay, I just found a few pictures that would go well in the Space Marine chapter tables. Thought I'd add some. Klarsh Voxiz 22:58, 6 March 2006 (CET)


Ok, I'm back. I'd just like to apologise for my rather long absence, had some rather difficult technical problems meaning I couldn't access Lexicanum! But I'm hopefully back now, looks like the place is still together! Just to say thanks to all you guys keeping the place together, you're doing a great job!--Jonru 10:33, 6 June 2006 (CEST)


Just got a question for you, as you seem to be one of the most active people on the English site. Do you think it is possible to have a seperate catagory under each faction (I have a Black Templar Crusade, with some accompaning short stories), that could be placed or named as 'user or custom' made? Such as we already have notable characters, but I am merely suggesting a seperate underscore to make things a little more interactive. However, I realize that this is probably not a good idea, as it allows too easily for non-cannon fluff to be written up. I mean, disclamers only help so much. But, I would love to get a little feedback on this idea. User:SwordofGod

Rules v Fiction

"Hi. Question: What is considered 'rules' that we can and cannot post about? I understand things like stat lines (X is BS3 etc.) are not allowed but what about, say, a weapon that doubles the strength of the user? Are you allowed to say that it doubles the strength of the user, or can we only imply that it has a great affect on the strength of the user? For example, if it says in a codex, the sword of bob gives +1 S and WS, how would we go about writing this up? Cheers --Jonru 16:01, 26 June 2006 (CEST)" ->Everything which is not background info should be considered as a no-go-area. Doubling the strength is a rule. Strengthening is borderline, if it's not something from the background. If it says in a codex what you mentioned above I wouldn't mention it at all, it's not really relevant for the background. --Inquisitor S. 16:31, 26 June 2006 (CEST)



Sorry 'bout that. Didn't realize, thought is was a mistake on your part, guess I was the one making the mistake ;) I already said this in my own usertalk but thought I put it here to, just in case. Considering the article you've got in mind on Close Combat Weapons: isn't it easier to use the categories for this? Make sub-cat. for, for example, lasweapons, plasma weapons, CC weapons etc. instead of different articles which have to be updates when new weapons are added? -- JoeneB, 16 July 2006, 11:43 (CEST)

Saw your reply. I think both options have merit, either a seperate article like you already did, or subcats. It's up to you ;) -- JoeneB, 16 July 2006, 11:47 (CEST).
Oh, before I forget, when you've decided, tell me, I'll revert the changes I made so you won't have to ;) -- JoeneB, 16 July 2006, 11:50 (CEST).


My god, who is this sad git who post up porn links on this wiki?--Vindicta 17:21, 21 July 2006 (CEST)


Some IP in the English whfb-lexicanum spammed frequently something about "Sigmar is the only female Ork know'n to exist" in the Sigmar-article. I removed but could you have an eye on it? --C.F.K. 14:27, 17 August 2006 (CEST)

Sure, i'll keep an eye on it, although I dont have the same powers there as I do here, i'm just a basic user over there. I dont think Sigmar is an Ork, let alone a female...--Jonru 22:33, 17 August 2006 (CEST)

Questions from AdmiralDick

Hey Jonru

i'm still trying to find my feet here and i was just wondering if you could answer a couple of questions i have. i've been looking through the pages and i notice that one of the things that appears to be lacking in some places is a definite structure to the individual articles, so i was wondering who was allowed to make a Template for a catagory? is it only you (as the... er... person in charge) or can other do them. that way i could help with the work load and help provide a sturcture to make contirbutors find it easier to add information. obviously i realise that this site has to compliment the german site, and i won't pretend to understand just what depth the relationship takes, so i can see how that would be an issue.

secondly, i was wondering about subcategories. i've noticed a couple of places where subcategories could be implemented (the Kroot as an example). there are a lot of articles that are placed into a category folder when they could be better taken out an place in a seperate subcategory (the Kroot weapons don't need to be in the alien races category, but a seperate Kroot subcategory). is it possible for me (as a contributor) to add a subcategory? or would that effect the infrastructure too greatly, moving it away from the German site and uncontrolable?

lastly, is it possible to create a new article without having to have already pointed to it with a link? i'd like to add a couple of articles that are currently unrelated to anything else (alien races for instance) but i can't work out how to create an article out of 'nothing'.

any answers would be appreciated, i'd like to be able to help out round here, to make it an even better resource than it currently is.


New Info Boxes

They look sweeeeeet :D I think they look better than the old ones, very nice work. I applied it to the Black Templars article and also added a mini pic. I think it works :) -- JoeneB, 26 September 2006, 20:04 (CEST)

I put this in your Userpage first... not the talk.. corrected this.. sorry :S

Your welcome :) Ok, I won't put any others in... just wanted to see how it would look in the BT article :) If I have some spare time, I'll try and help when needed... but I'm a bit busy atm. -- JoeneB, 26 September 2006, 21:41 (CEST)

Lexicanum Forum

There is a new Lexicanum Forum to discuss issues. Please make sure to read the Forum Guidelines first. --Inquisitor S. 21:58, 27 September 2006 (CEST)

Deletion Candidates

Don't want to be a nitpick but I believe you had to add your username, date and time to the made requests... if I remember correctly ;) -- JoeneB, 5 October 2006, 17:43 (CEST)

Image Help

Nice one Jonru :) I took the liberty "review" it and to add a small section on editing the image info. Could be handy for when someone forgets to add the appropriate info (as I saw Pitalla wanted to know where he could change it). I also suspect this article will be added to the list of Help article? :) -- JoeneB, 29 November 2006, 19:04 (CET)

Yes that's what I meant :) When writing a tutorial/manual I always assume people know jack sh... well you know ;) -- JoeneB, 29 November 2006, 23:56 (CET)

Codex Army Lists

The reason I set that as a link is because it is actually a publication in the 2nd Ed boxed set, in the same way as Ravening Hordes was for Fantasy Battle. I was aiming to create the page when I had time, but creating the link first would mean not having to set up the link at a later date. I'll make a placeholder page for now, and undo the deletion of the link. Slavedriver 20:18, 3 December 2006 (CET)

Deletion of Redirectional links: Why?

Hello. I've noticed that you've been deleting alot of redirecting links, such as the Justicator one, over the past couple of weeks. I must inquire as to why your doing this, because I find the redirections quite useful?--Orky 7:37 PM, 5 December, 2006 (EST).

minor correction on main page

Hi there, don't want to be nitpicking.. but I just noticed an error in the spelling on the main page:

Please note that the wiki is for official canon only. If you want to put your own armies up we suggest you log in and use your user page. Anything found outside of user pages while be subject to deletion.

I think while should be will ...it will be subject to deletion. :) that's all ;) -- JoeneB, 22 December 2006, 0:17 (CET)

p.s. Merry X-mas :D


Please contact me, I think we should talk about some kind of policy to deal with users that are not logged in, thx. --Inquisitor S. 13:54, 9 January 2007 (CET)

Blocking in WHFB-Lex

Hello, Jonru, please, why did you block me in the Whfb-Lex? - I just emptied a Page that contained spam and requested to delete that page and to block the Spammer (IP, that created the same Spam again now! --Dorle 21:13, 5 February 2007 (CET)


I've been noticing an error across many of the Space marine chapter pages recently and that is that when ever it says the name for a Fortress-Monestary, I get some wierd entry that says {{{Fortress-Monestary}}} and it will not go away, so far I've noticed it on the Grey Knights page and a couple of others.

--Nevan Vehkalh

User:Irulan edited the form (Template:LFSM) that is used on all of the pages. He added a line for Fortress-Monastery, but then did not update all the pages that linked to it. This caused the problem you have stated. To fix it on a specific page you would add "|Fortress-Monastery=Unknown" between 'Homeworld' and 'Descendants':


--Rlyehable 15:55, 26 March 2007 (CEST)

Irulan - Codex Assassins, two editions ?

Hey there, I finally found out what was the problem (you were giving info I was unable to find anywhere in the Codex Assassins I have in front of me). Apparently there are two editions. The one I have (actually it belongs to a friend who borrowed it to me) is the Codex Assassins (2nd edition), for sure. It has the same picture, which is not framed and the table around the title is golden in the fashion of the 2nd edition. It is quite alike the Codex: Assassins (3rd Edition). I hadn't noticed these minor diffrences (can someone truly blame me?), assuming the one I had was the 3rd edition (hey it also doesn't appear in the Codex's list). Sorry. I managed to find this link [1] where the Codex I have appears, without the cover, I'm afraid. Perhaps you can create a new article for this Codex? Then I will correct/link my edits to it (Oh, the joy :). Irulan 15:09, 22 February 2007 (CET)

I'm really not sure that there really is a codex in printed form for the 3rd Edition, sorry. I am quite sure that I have got all the codices published before the 4th edition and I only recall an Assassins Codex from the 2nd. In addition it is quite improbable that they would have used the same cover picture. See also here. As for now I am under the impression that the Assassins Codex adaption for the 3rd edition was either published in separate articles in WD or/and as a .pdf-document on GW's homepage...--Inquisitor S. 16:36, 22 February 2007 (CET)

Actually we have, on the Lexicanum(.com), the 3rd edition Codex:Assassins. I have seen this codex in the local game store, but never picked it up. --Rlyehable 17:21, 22 February 2007 (CET)

I am 99% sure that the two ISBN's refer to the same book. Look here:[2], the two ISN's are there. One is the ISBN with 10 numbers while the other one has 13 numbers. Strange, the first ISBN appears in the book I have in front of me (but not the second one). I am 100% that this book "here in my hands" is a "Codex: Assassins (2nd Edition)" because it is way too similar to the other books of the 2nd edition (see above), but it has indeed a slightly diffrent cover that the one in the article Codex: Assassins (3rd Edition). Jonru appears to have that version/edition (but with the same ISBN? Isn't that suppossed to be forbidden or something?). All this confusion could be avoided if Games Workshop bothered itself to print the edition numbers on the covers. Oh well. Irulan 17:31, 22 February 2007 (CET)
Actually the 40K-Symbol on a cover makes quite clear to what edition the codex is belonging. I still am in doubt if a Codex Assassins (3rd Edition) was ever published. Especially because the German Version of the 2nd Ed Codex was published in 1997 which is also the date given by your Amazon Link. This would mean that they'd have published 2nd Ed stuff in Germany in the same year in which your supposed 3rd edition codex was published which can't be true. --Inquisitor S. 18:06, 22 February 2007 (CET)
Oh and the 3rd Edition was officially released in 1998. --Inquisitor S. 18:09, 22 February 2007 (CET)
Codex: Assassins (3rd Edition) is ©1999 --Rlyehable 23:55, 22 February 2007 (CET)
Well I still doubt it. You know why? Because a Codex:Assassins with exactly that cover picture (3rd Ed logo) was published by GW Germany as a free, downloadable pdf-document. And because the ISBN-Numbers in that article correspond to the english version of the Codex Assassins 2nd Edition. --Inquisitor S. 00:11, 23 February 2007 (CET)

Ok I went to the movies yesterday, and meet my friend. He vaguely remembers that it was an extra offered with the White Dwarf. This was probably done to sell the miniatures and to whet the appetite of the gamers. A year (or nearly a year) the 3rd edition comes out, time to buy it "again". But he isn't truly sure this was more or less ten years ago. Irulan 17:44, 23 February 2007 (CET)

Interesting :) I seem to remember that in Germany the 3rd Ed. rules for Assassins were published in a number of White Dwarfs, quite possible that other national GW divisions did this as a giveaway with a single WD. However, if this issue is resolved it should be clarified in the corresponding Codex article, too. I just found this (Issue 235). I'm not quite sure what an "insert" is, but could well be what your friend remembers. Well, I just noticed that I should transfer the "useful" links to this wiki, I think it would help in many cases. --Inquisitor S. 17:59, 23 February 2007 (CET)

Problem in Fantasy-Lex

A User emptied the right bar in the Portal:Lexicanum page of the English warhammer fantasy lexicanum. I restored it, but I think, this cann't be accepted. --Dorle 10:17, 13 April 2007 (CEST)

Sorry, but while restoring - and then protecting - the Lexicanum:portal on the English warhammer fantasy lexicanum you made a mistake: Why did you put in the Tzaangor again? - It allready has its article. Also the information I placed on the top of the right columne is usefull:

  • "18.03.2007: It has happened: Since this day only registered and logged-in Users are able to write, work on and change content of articles in Lexicanum! With that the problems with unregistered IP-Users (i.e. spam, vandalism) should be history!"

The same text is there also in the other lexicanums. --Dorle 10:48, 13 April 2007 (CEST)

Vandalism by user

I don't know if you are the one to ask this but here goes.

Checking out the recent changes page something caught my eye for the edits on 1 May 2007:

  1. (diff) (hist) . . Mad Dok‎; 20:59 . . (-691) . . Von Shreck (Talk | contribs) (Replacing page with 'They are responsible for the sex changes so popular amongst Orks.')
  2. (diff) (hist) . . Ork Physiology‎; 20:57 . . (-11,866) . . Von Shreck (Talk | contribs) (Replacing page with 'Orks r the greenest and the meanest. Orks like da Boyz. Da Boyz r so kawaii. ^_~')
  3. (diff) (hist) . . Striking Scorpion‎; 20:53 . . (-1,292) . . Von Shreck (Talk | contribs) (Replacing page with 'Dildo Baggins.')

Perhaps this user should be banned/blocked as he/she has no meaningful contribution to the lexicanum and has only vandalized the pages? The pages in question are already restored by Wulfenlord. -- JoeneB, 2 May 2007, 11:41 (CET)

Duplicated Entry

Hello, I feel rather awful coming to you hat in hand, but it would appear that I have made a terrific mistake and created an entry that already existed in abbrieviated form - see Eugen Temba and Temba - my sincerest apologies for this, I can assure you that I'm rather embarrassed. May I request that the latter, older page be kept and whatever is felt relevant from the one I wrote could be copied over, allowing for its deletion? Of course, I volunteer to do whatever I can to help fix my mess! Thank you.Mob 20:57, 2 June 2007 (CEST)

Mob, don't feel bad. Everyone makes mistakes, and this one is quite easy to fix. All that has to be done is move some new, unmentioned info to the article, and put in a redirect. All non-mentioned info should go in the full named article(which is the one you made I believe) I'll take care of it. ---Psyco 12:54, 3 June 2007 (CEST)
Your article is much better. That old one was a stub anyway.---Psyco 12:57, 3 June 2007 (CEST)
Thanks very much to both of you for fixing the entry and the kind words, it's really appreciated!-Mob 14:56, 3 June 2007 (CEST)


Hey there, saw you added that block thingy with links to some space marines articles. First off, I like 'em :) Second, one point of criticism: reading some of the article the block links to, I can't help noticing the article, although correct, they do read, IMHO, a bit like the rule book :s ...I've rewritten the Terminator Command Squad article and will rewrite the others a bit if you don't mind (and when I find the time). Hope that's ok? -- JoeneB, 8 June 2007, 23:26(CEST)

Yeah, if you have the time... sure :D I think they are pretty cool and wikipedia also uses this for some subjects like WW2. I think they make finding info to related articles etc. more easily found. As for my small rewrite, tnx for the compliment :) -- JoeneB, 8 June 2007, 23:40(CEST)

Ok, I checked again and as far as I saw it, only the Command Squad articles needed to be rewritten... so I did them both (normal and termi). Time for bed. -- JoeneB, 9 June 2007, 0:17(CEST)

Two Spammers in the WHFB-Lex

Hello, would you block please two spammers in the WHFB English Lexicanum? - I just marked them with the template "block" and reverted their spam. --Dorle 10:40, 11 June 2007 (CEST)

Hello, Jonru, in the English Warhammer Fantasy Lexicanum there was a spammer again, which should be blocked! --Dorle 16:59, 13 June 2007 (CEST) -- Moved here was posted in my user page ;) -- JoeneB, 13 June 2007, 17:22 (CEST)

Links to GW .PDF Files

Inquisitor S. posted a note to me, early on, that GW .pdf files should not be linked to directly, but articles should be linked to the GW site that in turn links to the .pdf file. I believe this is to avoid circumventing the 'use policy' that proceeds most GW .pdf files. If this is indeed a Lexicanum standard, there a a good number of articles that need the sources redone. Most of these are articles about ships and other Battlefleet Gothic topics such as Red Squadron, Emperor Class Battleship, etc. --Rlyehable 12:00, 11 June 2007 (CEST)


Hello, why did you block me instead of that spammer "User:MwiT3r‎" in the English Fantasy Lexicanum? - This happend the second time now! --Dorle 09:42, 14 June 2007 (CEST)

More spammers

Could you block them? Seem to be randomly created users: Cr9W85 LdpY69 AxlR27 HbxTr2 Ri0E78. All they did was add spam to some random pages. I have removed the spam. -- JoeneB, 15 June 2007, 17:36 (CEST)


I cleaned up the stuff again. Anyway, I have some things to ask of you. Some proposals, etc etc. But some stuff I want to talk off of the Lexicanum. [email protected] is my standard email. Btw, check out the Mordian Iron Guard‎ to see how I dealt with the Imperial Guard portal and the boxes. I think it solves some of the errors. SanchiTachi 00:59, 19 June 2007 (CEST)

Just curious, but could we change the Miniatures Portal to "Designers and Designs" to cover both miniatures and the rule makers/army designers? I think they would go together nicely. SanchiTachi 05:41, 19 June 2007 (CEST)

I've been thinking about "Ordo Hydra". It was in one series of books and isn't really canonical (wasn't really back then either). It also doesn't appear in the Inquisitor game as a viable faction. Plus, with the Thorian Sourcebook, Gav Thorpe seems to say that a lot of what is posited in the Inquisition War books is outright crazy and wrong. I'm would like to know what your opinion is on them, if you have one. It makes me wish that GW had a review board that went through novels and had them change things like that. SanchiTachi 00:44, 24 June 2007 (CEST)

I put a note on the Inquisitor and Inquisition page about Ordo Hydra, so people don't confuse it with the other Ordos. I think Gav Thorpe knew about the books (he came right after that) and intended the Thorians of his game Inquisitor to clear most of that up. SanchiTachi 18:15, 24 June 2007 (CEST)

I've been thinking (I do that a lot :) ) about the histories. Could we create a column next to Source to put "Edition" so we can mark it with either 1st - 4th and with either A for Article, R for Rulebook, N for a fiction book, and C for Codex? It would make it easier to sort which information is which just visually (without having to hunt down individual items).SanchiTachi 18:17, 27 June 2007 (CEST)

Here is what I was thinking. From M1:

Year Event Source
500.M1 The three older Gods of Chaos, Khorne, Tzeentch, and Nurgle awake to full consciousness by the end of the Middle Ages. 1st R Realm of Chaos

Or something similar to denote the age/type of source. The codexes have the information in their name already, but many of the books, like the above, do not. SanchiTachi 17:14, 28 June 2007 (CEST)

If a piece of information has multiple sources, i.e. the fact that the Emperor creates Space Marines, etc, then there should be a link to that page, and that page will have the different versions/sources with the various details. SanchiTachi 16:56, 29 June 2007 (CEST)

Should the 11 armies be included on the mainpage? The official GW page and the online store both have them immediately after you click on Warhammer 40,000 and it might have some continuity. If not, thats okay. :) SanchiTachi 00:15, 29 June 2007 (CEST)

Back to the whole Imperial Fleet thing: I've looked over through all the rule books, and when it says a "Class" that is the variant title for a ship. Cruisers, Light Cruisers, Battleships, etc, are the base model and the first names are the variant. Since they are variants, I would think that the different Battleships should go together, the different Cruisers should go together, etc. By separating them, it makes it seem like they are different, but combining them gives the aesthetic of their unity. It also clears up a lot of different pages and allows for a list of "Obsolete classes" at the bottom of a page to link those many red link ships to. Also, I think that pages should be marked if their "dominant" game is not the standard Warhammer 40,000 game (i.e. the page I expanded on the other day, Sisters of Silence, should be noted as existing primarily in Horus Heresy card game. This can be done with a mention in the very beginning of a page. It would separate out Necromunda gamers, the different fleets, etc. Groups that don't have any miniatures or models should be noted as existing in the background fiction or something similar). SanchiTachi 23:40, 29 June 2007 (CEST)

I'm adding condensed content pages/short overviews of the many magazines and their issues. I will finish the two Black Library magazines soon, work on the White Dwarfs that I can (I have about 120), and whatever BFG magazine issues I can. The Citadel Journal will be a problem, but that is more fan base or has its information elsewhere, so is rarely referenced. After that, I will go through the specialist game pages and concurrently work on fixing/expanding some Necron and Eldar information (maybe even work on Squats and the other abhumans). After that, I will go full circle and work on the miniature pages (like my Black Library gaming pages and create more pages like the history page for the Imperial Guard miniatures). I'm trying to avoid the Space Marine and Tau areas. But yeah, I think I made a dent. I edited/created over 450 pages so far. I estimate thats about 70% done. :)

By the way, I updated, fixed, corrected, and rewrote most of the Games Workshop page, so its not a Wiki clone and has information necessary to the Lexicanum (instead of the junk that is tossed in from the wikipedia pages). SanchiTachi 05:44, 30 June 2007 (CEST)

Idea for dealing with regiments that are mentioned/notable without any real information on: How about putting them under the title of ===Other ____ Regiments === and bulleting them with *. It would make it not look as silly. How does that sound? :) SanchiTachi 01:03, 6 July 2007 (CEST)

Recent Ideas

1. I just got ahold of the new set for the Horus Heresy art books, so I can go through and compile most of the information. I was thinking about how to list the Imperial Guard Regiments. Instead of giving them their own page, have a separate page called List of Horus Heresy Notable Regiments. Then have the list of regiments link to that page. The Horus Heresy page would have a little bit of info, such as what their outfits are variants of (many look like cadians, catachans, and the like).

2. I'm going to expand some of the Horus Heresy card game pages, list more of the gaming facets, etc. Adeptus Custodes will have a section for the info from it to denote what is for the card game version.

3. I picked up the Last Chancers books, and I plan on putting in a page about them, and then expanding on the Gaunt's Ghost page, to talk about the units and similar things.

There is a bunch more, and I will be working on it Monday. I still have a bunch of magazines to add information for, plus articles on Inquisitor, Necromunda and BFG to add to the site. SanchiTachi 21:59, 7 July 2007 (CEST)

Also, I wanted to add: The Horus Heresy artbooks, and the books such as "Flight of the Einstein" are for the Horus Heresy branch of Warhammer 40,000, which is gaming around the card game. While it is tied to 40,000 like the others, the books are part of that version, as opposed to the mainstream version. I'm thinking that the books may need a mention, or should be organized accordingly (i.e. a catagory for the different games, like BFG, Horus Heresy, Necromunda, Inquisitor, etc). SanchiTachi 22:04, 7 July 2007 (CEST)

Well, this is what I found out: Originally, I saw the Flight of th Einstein book and was taken aback. They changed a lot of the original idea of the Horus Heresy, or expanded in ways that was dropped by Second Edition. Then, after seeing the art book, I realized that they were basing it all off the Horus Heresy card game (the companion to the Dark Millenium card game). Thus, Fulgrim, Flight of Einstein, etc, plus the collected visions books, were based off the plot branch found in there. They are all "canon" for the card game. That means that they are canon but also do not get outdated. They exist in almost an alternate but completely accurate branch. Its a little complicated. They added so much to the Horus Heresy that wasn't there in order to give background/expand on a game that would take place primarily in those 50 years. Thus, groups like the Sisters of Silence were created. Games like Battlefleet Gothic, Inquisitor, and Epic were created to directly connect to the other games (BFG and Epic had campaign books that connected their models with smaller skirmishes played by traditional 40,000 peices, Inquisitor had the Witch Hunters and Daemonhunters codexes created to go along with the Inquisitor game). The card games do not have this yet, although there was one professional GW based conversions for the Adeptus Custodes. Its all a little confusing, I know, but I am busily trying to draw up charts and other possible ways for organizing, and I will expand on the card game's page, add some pages for the other stuff, etc, and hopefully have something that people can read, understand the history, the connection, and how the books/game expands on the 40,000 universe. SanchiTachi 23:48, 7 July 2007 (CEST)

I wish Games Workshop would never have given BL enough freedom to put together that blasted fanforum, as all it did was encourage people like him to make up their own rambles and dislocate themselves from the reality of the game. They don't seem to understand that its a game, and that the fluff is secondary. SanchiTachi 23:22, 10 July 2007 (CEST)

Brief History of GW

Okay, just to put this somewhere (its about the gaming and the fluff): Games Workshop is the main company. They created the game Warhammer 40,000 and licensed other companies to produce miniatures for this. Finding out that it caused problems, they let only one company make the miniatures (Citadel). They later took them over. Citadel produced paints and other supplies (but as a separate company, they don't interfere with plot at all). Later, some other games were created, such as Adeptus Titanicus/Epic. This lead to the specialist games. However, they never formed a new company. But people wanted some literature, so they created the company Black Library, which spawned Forge World. Two new companies, operating independent but as part of the parent. Then came Sabertooth games, operating in the same.

Thus, we have:

  • Games Workshop
Warhammer 40,000, White Dwarf, Specialist Games, the Specialist Games magazines]
  • Citadel
Mostly just paint and landscape
  • Black Library
Citadel Journal (odd how that works), Novel lines, Comic lines, Artbook lines, some miniatures
  • Forge World
Their "rulebooks" and their models
  • Sabertooth Games
Horus Heresy (ended), Dark Millenium

Tournaments run by GW only allow items produced in the current edition Codexes and play by current edition rules. This solidifies that the core Warhammer 40,000 is the books. The rest are secondary, or fan based, i.e. to encourage fan involvement. Since Sabertooth Games operates in a different medium, it acts in ways that are not natural to the Warhammer 40,000 world. The most obvious thing is that the Emperor is still roaming around.

It gets tricky when looking at specialist games. Lets take the trickiest, Inquisitor, as it put forth a new reason for the creation of the Inquisition. This is legitimized (besides the fact of who the creator was) in the Warhammer 40,000 game since the two books, Witch Hunters and Daemonhunters were created to adapt the play of Inquisitor into the standard game.

Thus, GW produced Adeptus Custodes or Sisters of Silence for the standard game, it can be seen as the plot being legitimized into the standard game. As of now, that has not happened (except by a conversion detailed on the GW site for fan purposes).

Now, this has happened with a few of the books also (hence the BL gaming pages that I wrote and need to update). The two biggest ones are the Gaunt's Ghost and the Last Chancers. Gaunt's Ghost were given their rules and status in the codexes. Last Chancers were originally given their status and their creator, Gav Thorpe, decided to expand with a book. Creating new characters, the next version of the Codex dropped the old Chancers and put added Kage (adopting the character of the book). It has also happened for the videogame, Dawn of War, as the Blood Ravens were given an index astartes article and featured on the website (the other games, like Fire Warrior, didn't create new species or organizations).

There are books written for the standard game (Gaunt's Ghost, Last Chancers, Space Wolves, etc), books for Necromunda (Kal Jerico's), books for Epic (the Titan comics), books for Inquisitor (Eisenhorn and Ravenor), for BFG (I can't remember their names), books for Video Games (Dawn of War and Firewarrior), and books written for the Sabertooth games of Horus Heresy (the Visions series and the other "Horus Heresy" books) and Dark Millenium (Tales from the Dark Millenium). Only two books have created "new" organizations (the Gaunt's Ghosts and Last Chancers) and both of these were adopted as the standard system. Only one spin-off game has created a "new" organization and it was given both standard rules and books.

Now pages like the ships pages are definately for BFG. Titan pages are for Epic. (Forge World tends to bridge these some, those jerks :) ). Gang pages are for Necromunda and I will create some for Inquisitor (some things on classes).

But we should probably do something to help organize/separate them. Perhaps something like this (space marine based):

  • Space Marine (An "Organization page", start with general info, sections at bottom for previous codex versions and other games, list of other pages mentioned below)
    • Individual pages for chapters (should have history, primarch info, organization including units used with any special names, special features, special characters)
  • Space Marine Codex Army (for 40,000)
    • Page for Units (broken into classes if necessary), Page for Vehicles, Page for Equipment, Page for Forgeworld
  • Space Marine Fleet (for BFG)
    • Indiv Ship Class Pages not needed, be formated like the Hive Fleet page (unlike the Imperial Navy's organization)
  • Space Marine Epic Army (for Epic)
    • Page for Units, Page for Vehicles, Page for Titans, Page for Planes
  • n/a for gangers (for Necromunda)
  • Character Classes (Space Marine listed as one of the many classes with any character links) (for Inquisitor)
  • Space Marine Card Game Units (for Horus Heresy and Dark Millenium)

SanchiTachi 01:05, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

I just finished putting up the complete plot summary of Daemonifuge.

List of things that I will be working on:

  • finish putting up the Last Chancer's summary and update the Warhammer 40,000 Last Chancers page with details
  • finish making a page cataloging the history of the Necromunda miniatures/gangs, like I did for the Imperial Guard miniatures
  • put together a page for the Inquisitor classes and then a page for the Inquisitor miniatures
  • move onto some more books (Gaunt's Ghost, a bunch of short stories, etc) and put up more details of the Horus Heresy Visions books (summaries of section)
  • put more information Realm of Chaos series (summaries of sections)
  • put up more details concerning the Horus Heresy card game, information on cards, make a new page for the Adeptus Custodes version in the HH game with details on cards
  • put up more information on Epic pieces, and various Titans
  • finish information on Dawn of War and Firewarrior video games
  • finish black library gaming pages (I have a bunch more info to put in)

After that, I will be taking a break, since my doctoral program will be starting back up. I think once this information is all put up, the Lexicanum will have progressed quite a bit. :) SanchiTachi 22:35, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

Templates with px size

I see that you have been playing with Template:Planets to try to adjust the planet image size. I may have a solution. Take a look at what I did with Template:Sept. I added a "Planetary Image Px" field for the pixel size of the image. This allows the author to adjust the viewing size of the image. It also does not break the template for pages that have already used the template. --Rlyehable 13:17, 12 July 2007 (CEST)

It did, however, require that the additional field spaces be added manually, which caused a lost of formating on quite a few of the different space marine templates. I would suggest going to a fixed pixel instead of having a variable picture size for now. SanchiTachi 17:52, 12 July 2007 (CEST)

Problem in WHFB-Lex

The User:Fl4C1w added spam to the English WHFB-Lexicanum and should be blocked. --Dorle 20:29, 15 July 2007 (CEST)

I have an idea. If we have a thing in the sign up that forces people to put in a security code/human verification code that yahoo and other services use, you could cut down on the spam bots a lot. SanchiTachi 04:35, 21 July 2007 (CEST)

Hey, I tried out a new idea I had: Last Chancers (Novel Series), banners. The only problem is the conflict of the banner with the "jump to" part. The jump to serves no real function, is it possible that it could be removed? :) SanchiTachi 21:12, 21 July 2007 (CEST)

Well, I was thinking that the banner could be used instead of having to say "in warhammer 40,000, there is a blank that is part of blank and thats probably important for some reason". I was mostly bored and wanted to see what it would look like. :) SanchiTachi 23:21, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
Sure thing. Once I recover some from the Summer, I will put up quite a bit of content. I have about 20 notebook pages worth of information to fill in. It should be fun. :) SanchiTachi 23:39, 24 July 2007 (CEST)


Tnx, I will try to check in now and again but can't give any guarantees :) and even though I'll be severely Internet impeded, I'm still looking forward to moving out and the job I'm moving for (too bad you can't be a student forever :s) -- JoeneB, 25 July 2007, 9:06 (CEST)

Well I'm back... sort of :P Still haven't got an internet connection at my new place but that's being worked on. As I haven't got much to do at the moment, I'm back at my parents for some days a week so I'll be checking in and see what I can contribute/edit/etc. I also noticed something hinky happend here... I've tried to get the whole picture regarding the Damnatus thing and the sanchi dude... Interesting reading to say the least ;) I won't be sorry he's gone... too bad about his contributions though (the ones that did help). Hope they can be reinstated somehow (because I highly doubt his claim of owning the copyrights, but then again... I'm no lawyer :D). Anyway.. enough talk about that guy. Good riddance to bad... well you know the proverb I tink ;) -- JoeneB, 15 August 2007, 21:55 (CEST)