RC I need the Campaign Infobox template you designed massively simplified. Remove all the automated functions from it, so that it can just be filled out by hand. Everything on this wiki needs to be as simple as possible. If that template is not simplified nobody but you will use it correctly, and I would like to use it from now on, so you can leave the instruction for the template but remove all of the IC, CC, F, S coding and the template's tendency to automatically assign values when things are not filled out. Simple, always simple.
I thought the instructions are pretty clear, and I further simplified them. I thought it is simpler to let the template fill in some repetitive functions. The reasons for the automated functions are 2:
1. Consistency. All campaign infoboxes look and act the same, and the most important info is also consistently expressed. I was actually thinking of assigning specific default colors depending on the chosen category (say, Chaos Campaigns could always be by default black on red, etc.) Since infoboxes are supposed to give a snapshot of the page for those too short of time or too lazy to read the text, it's important to have consistent signifiers.
2. Reuse. All templates can use the automated code. The "cat" field can be used in all other infoboxes, by simply changing the category parameters. The "status" field can be used for example in the Infobox Chapter, in place of "allegiance". Example: change the signifiers to L, T, P, R, X (to result in Loyalist/Traitor/Penitent/Renegade/eXtinct). "Status" is also imo better than "Allegiance". Allegiances fluctuate. The "segmentum" field can be used in any infobox that includes a segmentum field.
However if you don't agree I will remove the auto code.
I undertsand your point, but those instructions are quite simply too complicated. Also we are not ever going to use a color coded system for infoboxes. Always think simple, as simple as possible. Everything on this wiki is extremely simple by design. Trust me, I've done this for a long time, that infobox coding will be constantly screwed up by users, which is why I hate Infoboxes and really would prefer to make as few as possible. Please remove the auto code and make it a simple fill-in Infobox. That way it will be used from now on for all campaigns. The other way, almost no one will use it except you and we will end up using the old one. Thanks.
RC, If you are going to create new categories, I need you to do the work of placing every single page that belongs in those categories into them. If you do not want or have the time to do this, please do not create new categories. I will be allowing the Xenos and Chaos Campaigns categories to stand as I think they are a good addition that we can use, but I will be deleting the general Campaigns category as far too broad unless you are willing to place every single campaign page currently on the wiki into it. It's up to you. Will you undertake the project?
Yeah, one of the reasons I created the category Campaigns was to put any page that would not normally fit into the specific ones (Imperial/Chaos/Xenos), or as a temporary holder. The other reason is to categorise pages that add the Infobox Campaign, when the editor does not care to give a value to field "cat". Now how do I find out which are the campaign pages? Then I can proceed to add them to the appropriate categories.
I will restore the Category Campaigns until this is sorted. Also will change the intro text in Category:Xenos Campaigns. It says campaigns "by or against" Xenos races. This is incorrect. All campaigns are undertaken by the initiating (attacking) side. Even between xenos races, the campaign refers to the attcking xenos. The defense against a campaign is a result, and part of the campaign itself.
No, that's pretty debatable. A campaign is any military operation involving two sides, you can simply arbitrarily choose to define it by who is the attacker and the defender. We don't define the other campaigns that way, simply by who fought, this is why I really don't like these categories. The fewer categories the better. But if you are willing to do the work, you can move forward with the project and restore the general Campaigns category for every thing. However, I need this done relatively soon, so I dont want it stretching over days and days and confusing the hell out of everyone.
As to how you can find the campaigns, look through the Imperial Campaigns category and the History categories. That should cover all of them to my knowledge save for any that were not categorised, though I believe we have tagged them all. And I do NOT want pages removed from the Imperial Campaigns category. Define the new ones however you want and feel free to add t the new categories as long as you cover them all, but I want the existing ones left as they are.
Also, don't define the Campaigns Category that specifically as you did on its page. It IS a general category and now every Campaign on the wiki must be added to it IN ADDITION to the subcategories. This is why I didn't want it. Adding a specific defintion to the category is meaningless, because no one reads the Category pages, they just add them based on what they say, so they need to be very simple and very specific. So if you're going to keep the general Campaigns category, you need to add every single campaign on the wiki to it and we will have to do so from now on. Thanks.
I think you are mixing up "campaign" with "war". A campaign is a planned operation, and the planner is always the initiator or attacker for the campaign purposes. It is incorrect to define it by the opposing sides -- only 1 side planned it and executed it, the other side simply reacts. A war is a different story and may include several campaigns. These are commonly accepted definitions, and I have seen no evidence in WH40K canon material that contradicts them. So adding pages in the "Imperial Campaigns" category when they are not, is fan fiction. Many campaign-related pages are therefore non-canon as they stand.
I don't see why a campaign page must be added to both the "Campaigns" category AND the appropriate subcategories? It should only be added to the subcategory. The generic category is only a temporary holder, or for when the particulars of the campaign are unclear. The Infobox helps in this respect by giving the appropriate options in clear language, so the articles are immediately tagged. Btw, the instructions are very clear and they are to be followed. If someone does not have the patience to do that, then they should not be using the infobox.
Forget it, several campaign pages are locked. Just leave me a message if/when you decide to allow edits. However I will try to limit my edits to pages that are not miscategorised. One example: Horus Heresy. This is categorised as an "Imperial Campaign"(!?!?!)
Also the History category has itself as subcategory. I tried to remove the costly (performance-wise) self-reference, to no avail.
I don't think it is semantics at all, that's an arbitrary decision that is not according to canon. Miscategorising WH40K events/places/names etc is non-canon as much as incorrectly presenting them by misspelling.
The other thing is, why should any pages be locked? It doesn't make sense. GW constantly updates the canon. EVERY official article, short story, supplement, novella, novel, edition etc. either adds, subtracts or updates the universe. Even official blog posts. All pages must be available so thay are continuously updated.
Also some of the locked pages have clearly non-canon info. so noone can fix them even if they wanted to. This all is becoming very tiresome.
Uhhh, I asked you which pages you tried were locked so I could unlock them. You are right they should be unlocked. Many pages were locked in the early days because the vandalism was constant after 5 years of abandonment and I had to do it to stop doing dozens of repairs every day while I rebuilt the wiki. So please stop castigating me for something that was necessary a long time ago and that you know nothing about since you weren't here then, THAT is growing tiresome. If you don't like the way we run things here, you might prefer to contribute to the Lexicanum which would seem to be more in line with your views, though we have welcomed your excellent contributions.
If you tell me what pages were locked, I will unlock them. If you tell me when you find one that escaped my notice I will unlock it. I thought we had unlocked almost all of the major pages except for the core Space Marines portal page, so it's good to know which ones I missed so I can open them up. Thanks.
You're wrong. I was around when Baneblade was admin and contributed anonymously a couple of times. I registered just before he quit. I don't remember a vandalism crisis. Some pages were vandalised, but nothing in my knowledge that would require dozens of pages (out of a then few hundred) to be locked.
Locking a page is absolutely a last resort on wikis since it goes against the idea of wiki in the first place. It is done temporarily for a few HOURS or days at most, and usually in only 2 cases:
1. Until vandals are banned, or
2. Until a dispute between well-meaning editors is resolved, in order to stop a revert war.
Locking a page for weeks, months, or years is effectively banning everybody else. NO page should be locked for over a few days, period. There's other ways of dealing with bad editors that affect only them.
You are right about one thing though. I've had enough with this, it's not worth the trouble.
As always, your attention to detail and dedication to our formatting guidelines is a real asset to the wiki. However, the Months of Shame does not need its own page. That information is rightly centralised on the First War for Armageddon page, where the story has already been added in less detailed form. You may complete the page, but when it is done I will be moving any non-redundant information to the appropriate section of the First War for Armageddon. Also, please do not remove any sectons of the Kysnaros page -- if that is your intention -- as that is quite fine as is. As we discussed once before, please stop making edits over and over and over again to the same pages. Produce a final draft and then move on; there is no need for the constant re-editing. Your work is fine. Please produce a final draft and then move on so that I can do the final edit. I greatly respect your attention to detail and absolute fidelity to getting it right; but too much perfectionism can be an obstacle in itself.
Well, I think you are wrong. The Months of Shame has nothing to do with the Armageddon War. It started as a distinct campaign by the Inquisition to deal with the repercussions after the war had ended. It does not belong to a page describing the war. You might as well move all the pages to the Horus Heresy, as everything that happened in WH40K is part of the HH aftermath. Secondly, the conflict between the Inquisition and Space Wolves is a pretty important one and has to be made explicit. In this respect, you introduce non-canon material when you write "harmony was restored" after the Months of Shame (in the First War for Armageddon page). Another non-canon edit is adding (in Hyperion) that the Inquisition besieged Fenris because they wanted the Wolves to stop protecting the Armageddon defenders. That's not how ADB writes it. By that time, the purges were over as they had failed. The Inquisition besieged Fenris because it wanted to force the Wolves to comply with the "wishes of the Throne" (=Inquisition) in general, as Kysnaros put it to Hyperion. Feel free to delete the page, but I'm not going to continue writing something that will not be used properly. As for the other edits, I think if something is or becomes important, or if it helps to clarify, it should be added to a page. As new pages are created, older pages may need to be amended to accomodate newer info.
I'm just a reader, not an editor. But I do have to agree that, now that an entire novel has gone into detail about it, the Months of Shame are a completely different beast from the First Battle for Armegeddon. The latter was a war between the Imperium and Angron. The former was a war between the Space Wolves and the Inquisition (well, to be honest, it was only "almost a war" by 40k standards where factions of the Imperium shedding each others' blood is standard procedure, but by normal real world standards, it sure as heck was). Sure, the former caused the latter, but the Plague of Belief was caused by the Age of Apostacy yet it gets its own separate page (fittingly enough, it also involved the Space Wolves).
IMHO, something as detailed as the actual battle the Space Wolves fought with the Inquisition really should get its own page, whether or not it was the war for Armegeddon that caused it (and it was an actual battle... several battles, actually. People died, ships were destroyed with ALL HANDS including Grey Knights, etc etc. IE, thousands upon thousands of people and many Space Marines died during it. Small scale for Warhammer 40k but still quite a big chunk of people). The Months of Shame, after the novel extrapolated on them, contains several battles and campaign actions that have nothing to do with Armegeddon other than that they were over a reason caused by it's aftermath.
One could also argue that the Battle of Calth and Ishtvaan and all the other Horus Heresy battles are just battles, not campaigns (unlike the Months of Shame, which lasted far longer and was an actual campaign of several battles), yet they get their own pages.
You know what, I've changed my mind. I apologise. I'm wrong. I think you're right. Finish the page. I'll let it stand on its own. Let's see how it turns out. I will remove the edit on the Hyperion page concerning the reason for the siege of Fenris.
As to the other edits, perhaps I made my point unclear. Of course you can add additional information. However, it would be better if you could produce your final edit in a few days. Instead of revising and revising and revising, don't create the page until you are relatively sure you are satisifed with the material. If you need to add more material later, that's fine, but you can end up revising the same page for weeks. It's not necessary. Start the page when you are already satisifed that you've covered all your bases and then move on. You're an excellent editor and we would like to see you cover more topics. It's not an insult or a criticism, it's because we would like to see more of your work in other areas.
No problem, will be glad to finish it. Thanks for the compliment, and any new page will be delivered finished. However, the canon does get amended or added to (I consider canon the latest official publication on the subject: for instance if Black Library publishes a Grey Knights novel that amends/adds to the Grey Knights codex, then the latest official canon regarding the Knights, is IMO that novel). Speaking of the Black Library (the Eldar one) that is a good example: Atlas Infernal added a whole lot of info, some of which is not included in the Black Library page, or is included without explanation. For example it seems the Craftworld appears to different people according to their proclivities, to psyker Draco it appeared as a psychic entity, to non-psyker Czevak it appeared as an architectural marvel.
I'll try to get to it after the Months of Shame. One of the things that did strike me with "Emperor's Gift" is the whole Ferrymen/Phlegyras episode. This added nothing to the story and there was no need for its inclusion. It sticks out as a sore thumb. My thinking is that this will be expanded. Abnett is writing a sequel to the Ravenor trilogy named "Pariah" (hmmm), which chronologically should be taking place at the time Hyperion was training to become a Grey Knight. And Hyperion was Ravenor's charge. So maybe further edits will be needed down the road. I think the canon is up for a major turn, as we now have 3 classes of "sons" of the Emperor: the Primarchs (vat grown), the Sensei (biological) and the Grey Knights (surgically manufactured). The Grey Knights are interesting. If the Emp was the collective incarnation of the shamans, each Grey Knights could be the fragmentary incarnation of the Emperor.
I think the whole thing is in a process of evolution, and may eventually be completely changed, just as they did with the Necrons. They've already given hints of alterations to the Space Marine creation process with organ implanatation through surgical means being partially replaced by "viral machines" ala the Blood Angels Codex. Also, there is a lot of contradiction which they rarely make attempts to retcon, particularly in the older material. It can be frustrating at times.
No doubt. Anyway I finished with the Months of Shame. Also added another infobox, Template:Infobox Campaign2 that includes some of the fields in Wikipedia's infobox "Military campaigns". If you don't think it is useful, I will reinsert the original infobox.
I was just wondering why you added that line about the Primarch data being lost to both sides during the war. I just finished Deliverance Lost, and no where does it say that the Primarch data was lost. Yes, the Alpha Legion acquired it after introducing the warp-virus, yes, they handed over tainted data to Horus and Fabius, but the ending clearly states that Omegon believed they would be able to use the Primarch data, and then it ends. Do you have a source to backup this statement? Or is this mere conjecture on your part?
What I wrote was that the Primarch sample/data was lost (meaning it was lost to the Imperium). I did not write the particular sentence you are referring to so I can't answer the question. I added similar info to the Primarch article, in the section Lost Future of the Primarchs: "Additionally, the pure Primarch gene-stock sample was lost during the Horus Heresy after it was given to the Raven Guard and contaminated by a Chaos taint, and was stolen by the Alpha Legion. " This is my position in this. Now, I suppose one could say that since in the intervening years nothing has come out of the stolen gene-seed, then it means that it was irreparably damaged and the Alphas were left with junk in their hands. I did not make that argument, but whoever did has a logical basis for it, I think.
Ok, I wasn't sure who wrote what, the editing log isn't overly specific - I'm just used to Lexicanum where the moderators are extremely strict about people citing their sources / not making things up. My office recently put in new security on our internet to stop us from wasting time while at work so I can't get into Lex no more, I find myself lucky to have found this one still unblocked haha.
But you see what I mean right? The line that says " The Alpha Legion had been assured by the Tech-adepts of the Dark Mechanicus that this daemonic taint could be removed once the Primarch gene-stock was in the hands of the Traitors, but this assertion proved to be incorrect and the pure Primarch genetic material's benefits were lost to all sides in the conflict as a result."
Having just finished that book myself (it was totally awesome btw) I was wondering if I'd skipped a page or something b/c they never answered whether or not they were able to remove the daemonic taint. If this is just logical conjecture than sure, it might be true, or perhaps the Alpha Legion did manage to purge the taint. I recall having read things in the past where the Alpha Legion had been declared completely annihilated by the Inquisition only to resurface again. Maybe it's just b/c of the Alpha Legion's nature that they appear to be terminated and then resurface, or perhaps they do in fact have the pure data and rebuild their Legion every time they get low in number. I just think it's best for whatever is GW canon to be the only thing in the main articles, and leave speculation for forums or other pages, for the sake of those new to the 40k universe.
Like I said I'm new to this wiki, and looking to help out, so for the moment I'm just trying to get an understanding of what's acceptable and where people can post their own theories, after all, in my opinion the best part about this universe is the number of unanswered questions that allow the players to use their imaginations.
I think that there is an effort here to comply with canon, although it may not always be successful, especially in incorporating updates and retcons.
To concentrate on the issue you raised: keep in mind that Omegon stole the undifferentiated Primarch gene "goo". The secrets to extract and then unlock the Corax/Raven Guard compatible gene seed from the tremendously complicated pure Primarch goo had stumped everyone including Corax. It is clear from DL that Corax was only able to unlock his (and the RG's gene sequence) only because he had been psychically imprinted with specific, Corax/RG information from the Big E. He didn't even understand the info - he just remembered it. Therefore I would think that the Alpha Legion would be rather hard pressed to take advantage of the sample.
1. They have to "untaint" the sample (and who can tell whether it will be REALLY free of taint, no matter what the robots aka Mechanicum adepts say?)
2. They have to understand the pure "goo" enough to isolate and extract the Alpharius Primarch strand.
3. They have to understand the Alpharius strand enough to isolate and extract the Legion (Alpha Astartes) subset
4. They have to understand the Legion subset enough to recreate a WORKABLE gene-seed as the DNA combinations are in the untold billions.
In short I think that although they might or might not have created something with the goo as it stood, I doubt it would be what they had in mind
OK there seems to be some confusion here. We NEVER MAKE THINGS UP. This is a canon wiki. There is a separate wiki here on wikia for fanon. The only truly fan-made material on this wiki is art, and we are now much more selective about what fan-made art we will allow and prefer official art in its place whenever possible.We comply with canon in all factual areas and never deliberately contradict it unless there is an actual contradiction in the canon (which does, sigh, happen a lot). If someone extrapolates some information from something in canon that is conjecturally obvious, we will generally let it stand if it does not contradict something stated elsewhere. This wiki has almost no regular (i.e. daily or every other day) editors, and was abandoned outright for almost 3 years before we got it running again 2 years ago, so large swathes of the content other than our Space Marines pages are only beginning to be updated to the 5th Edition standard, i.e. all the retcons for certain races like the Dark Eldar and the Necrons. Considering where this wiki was only 2 years ago, I think we have done an amazing job with what we have, and our usage statistics reflect that.
With that said, there is plenty of room for improvement. One area where we differ greatly with the Lex is their strictness about sourcing. Every page needs to be sourced with the codex or novel or background book that all relevant information used in that page's construction was taken from. But we do not use footnotes, as that is a Wikipedia convention that we have abandoned since bottom-page sourcing is more than enough in most cases. This is a deliberate choice on this wiki intended to make it a lot easier to edit articles. I personally also find the use of footnotes an incredibly over-anal academic convention which is pretty pointless in an entertainment-based wiki. I know many people disagree with that opinion. That's why the Lexicanum exists and is the great resource that it is. The use of page numbers in all sourcing is definitely preferred and encouraged, particularly for White Dwarf articles, Codexes and Background Books. But if someone does not cite the page numbers in, for instance, the synopsis of a novel, I'm not going to have a cow. In most cases, people can just read the book if they really need to fact check something.
I hope that makes our policy in these matters more clear. If there are any more questions on these matters, which are not made clear enough in the Important Links on our main page, please do not hesitate to ask me.Thanks, and have fun.
Also, in relation to the above issue concerning the Alpha Legion, i could not find the fact you were referencing. If you could point me to the article and sentence (s) you are referring to I will edit it to be more ambiguous if that is warranted, but I tend to agree with RC's reasoning in this matter, which is the type of obvious logical conjecture I was referring to. However, should later sources show the Alpha Legion did something with the stolen gene-seed, we would, of course, fix it and include the new information.
3rd to last sentence: "The Alpha Legion had been assured by the Tech-Adepts of the Dark Mechanicus that this daemonic taint could be removed once the Primarch gene-stock was in the hands of the Traitors, but this assertion proved to be incorrect and the pure Primarch genetic material's benefits were lost to all sides in the conflict as a result."
So you see my confusion - the first part of the sentence is true, that's in Deliverance Lost - but the latter part is pure conjecture, b/c nowhere in the novel does it mention that and I'd never even heard of either Corax or Alpharius/Omegon having the Primarch gene-data in anything outside this novel. I mean, yes, it could be true, but the argument that Alpharius or Omegon were able to purify the data and simply haven't used it is equally as strong
- Alpharius/Omegon are in fact not loyal to Chaos or their Traitor brothers (at least, as far as we've been led to believe) and so may simply have chosen not to use the data despite possibly being able to correct the taint
- That they haven't used the data in any noticeable way is no proof to the fact that the data was lost, it's in their nature to be secretive, unless something canonical explicitly states otherwise
One thought as I reread that again though is that whoever penned those words may simply have meant to say that neither the Traitors nor the Loyalists were able to use the data and it was lost to them, but they weren't including the Alpha Legion in either of those groupings. If this is the case, maybe consider rewording it to specify that it was lost to the Loyalists, the tainted data Horus and Fabius received was unusable, and that it remains unknown what happened to the gene-data that Alpharius/Omegon kept.
Heh, sorry if I'm being a pain in the ass about this, I'm very aware that this is a very minor point in the overall scheme of things and need not be made a fuss over until GW / BL tells us one way or the other what happened. I just happen to be a fan of the idea that Alpharius/Omegon still has the data and is still working to purify it / has successfully done it and taken 10,000 years to put the plans in motion; seeing something blatantly tell me my fantasies are false kinda grinds my gears when technically it's still an unknown.
Yeah, I'm sorry this is an example of a massive nitpick. RC's logical conjecture was fine and could easily be changed were it to be later proved wrong. However, as the final sentence was not 100% true since the answer remains unknown, the entry is now more ambiguous.
Just wanted to say that most info is written from a canonical, mostly pro-Imperial/anti-Chaos viewpoint. That is why for example the Word Bearers are described as Traitors and not as misunderstood philosophers. For the Imperium, the Alphas are Traitors, whether they think otherwise or not, and whether they have been misguided or not. Don't forget they are said to act according to how they THINK the Emperor would want them to - they don't really KNOW how the Emperor would react. After 10000 years of hostile actions they may seem a bit negative to the eyes of the average Imperial. As for the gene sample, the phrase "it is lost" I think describes the canon as it stands now in all its possibilities.
Well put RC; and Mont sorry - totally did not mean to make such a big deal outta what is obviously a very small detail. Like I said before, I'd just read the book and when I came across the line in the article I was like "Wait! Did I miss that?!" Either way, sorry to be an unintentional pain in the ass.