Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum talk:Accepted sources
- 1 Discussions of the Help article NOT related to the question if a specific source is accepted or not
- 2 Sources requiring a discussion/ ruling
- 3 Not-official Reddit forums talking about official products
Any discussion of the content of this Help article not dealing about the status of a specific source goes here: ...
Sources requiring a discussion/ ruling
Any discussion about the status of a specific source goes here:
Note: Each new ruling request has to be submitted under its own heading, in chronological order! And each request has to be signed.
- Answer: Yes./ No. Because...
The First Expedition Forums - Primarch rediscovery order
Question: This source (specifically the posts by Laurie Goulding) has been used on the Primarch page, as a reference for the Primarch rediscovery order. While it's a post on an unofficial forum (with the usual third-party boilerplate about its content not being endorsed by GW, BL, FW, etc.), it was written when he was still the chief editor for Black Library, and is explicitly said to be Games Workshop's official stance on the order in which the Primarchs were found (to the point of him saying it's not really up for debate). It generally seems to be corroborated by published sources too (see the dates, with citations, for the various Primarchs being found here, and the reference to the third Primarch found being one of the missing two in Wolfsbane (Novel)). Should this be considered an accepted source? It certainly falls into the Lexicanum's 'grey area' as far as valid sources go. -- The Warmaster (talk) 09:36, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
- I will stick with my stance that what BL people do in their private time and webspace does not constitute a valid source for main article content. The header of these forums makes the reliability very clear: "The content of this forum is not officially endorsed by Games Workshop, Black Library or Forge World and no challenge is made to any copyright or intellectual property." Therefore I think it should be relegated to a trivia and notes section. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 18:02, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Policy regarding self-taken screenshots
Question: I'm currently preparing a story summary for Chaos Gate: Daemonhunters, and also planning on updating the information regarding the Baleful Edict, mainly with general information (such as it using a plasma reactor, being unique in having a prognosticator choir, etc). As part of this update to the Baleful Edict page, I was planning on adding an image of the ship I took in-game when it's undamaged (part of the game mechanics is repairing the ship). Would this fall into accepted sources for the Lexicanum, as it's from an official source (the game), but isn't a promotional screenshot or similar? --Timberley (talk) 12:07, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Since a screenshot is a faithful reproduction of an official source I do not see any problems with this. Provided it does not get manipulated in a misleading way obviously. If for example you make a composite of different screenshots that should be clearly stated. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 12:18, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- For some general image requirements see also here. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 12:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Not-official Reddit forums talking about official products
- To put the link into context, the four images are taken from a twitch stream that Warhammer Combat Cards' developer, Flaregames, did last year. The third and fourth image in the link shows two of the company's employees. The same two employees can be seen playing the game in numerous videos on Flaregames' youtube page. Dram (talk) 07:34, 27 March 2023 (UTC)