No need to worry, I'm just testing a auto-superscripter program I'm writing specifically for cleaning up wiki text. It still has a few bugs in it though, which is why I'm constantly reverting my edits.
According to head admin Montonius, there shouldn't be a st/nd/rd/th after Legion designations i.e. XIXth Legion should be XIX Legion. It's not hugely urgent that we change all of these on all the wiki pages, but should you encounter them in future it would be great if you could remove them.
Thanks for all the work on superscripting!
RE: Great Britain or Albania
Albia is commonly confused with Albyon. Albia is known to have clashed frequently with the Panpacific Empire under the rule of the Unspeakable King. Where Albyon was ruled by the tyrannical Uilleam the Red, who was defeated by the Emperor's forces and imprisoned in the dungeon of Khangba Marwu in the Himalazian (Himalayan) Mountains. The articles have been updated to reflect the original canon as written on the Unification Wars article. Sorry for the confusion.
Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 19:52, August 25, 2016 (UTC)
Hey just thought I'd say nice job catching that whole "Space Marine Chapter" / "Space Marine Chapters" category issue, one of those things that just floats under the radar, but its essential that tags are working so good work. I untagged all the pages in the "Chapter" page, so all should be well. See ya around.
Hey, I noticed on the first war for Armageddon, it says Angron was banished for 100 years and on a grins chosen it says 1000 years which is true? ~Alpha~ 15:50, April 26, 2016 (UTC)Alpha~Alpha~ 15:50, April 26, 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your recent edits on the Crimson Fists, Excoriators and Imperial Fists pages. However, with that being said, though I appreciate your efforts to standardize these pages, in the future DO NOT remove sources that have been added to an article. I noticed that you removed my references to the "The Beast Arises" Series and the subsequent novels. These were posted in accordance to our wiki's "Manual of Style" and rules. If you disagree with the format, please bring your concerns to myself or Zixes. I understand you might disagree, but keep in mind, ultimately it is we, the Mods, who have final say-so on any particular edit to an article. This is your first warning. Do no remove content from an article again, or this could result in possible disciplinary action against your account (ie temporary suspension and/or ban for an indeterminate period). Thank you for your understanding!
Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 19:52, August 25, 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the welcome! It's so gratifying to be greeted so warmly after so long away.
As to your question, I prefer that no superscriptions be used, period. However, after speaking with Algrim, who likes their use, I have agreed that I will not alter any superscriptions where they already exist, but that I will not be using them on any new material. Superscriptions should NEVER be used with Roman numerals, for reasons I explained on Algrim's talk page if you wish to look. So, I would say please leave them in place wherever they are now, but no further use of them in future. I know this violates the principle of wiki consistency, which is unfortunate, but that's the deal I struck and that's what we'll hold to.
On another note, thanks for all your help, I've reviewed your contributions to the wiki and they're great, keep it up!
Hi Voodo! I've noticed that you have added the roman superscriptions to the Mantis Warriors page a day or two ago. I do remember that Montonius asked you to stop doing that. Because, as it turns out, the more superscriptions the page has, the more time it takes for the phone-users to load our wiki pages.
I am sure that you can be useful in other ways. I hope that no harm was done.
Thanks for all your hard work on the standardisations. It's really appreciated and very necessary if often overlooked and painstaking work.
As to fortress-monastery...sigh, that's a hard one. Both forms were originally correct and were used by GW across the various editions. Looking back on it I guess I changed them where I felt the text was best served, and that changed from page to page. But in general, the rule should be lower case when talking about a fortress-monastery and upper case when talking about the Ultramarines Fortress-Monastery to make the differential between the regular and proper noun. However, I realise I was not enforcing this standard across all pages. That's my bad, I apologise. So let's use this one from now on. I will hold myself to it in future. I wouldn't waste your time going back through all the other pages to fix it, let's just make sure we use it going forward. Thanks so much for bringing the error to my attention.
Thanks for the accolades! It is much appreciated...yeah, so now you have just a taste of the headache we mods have to deal with on a daily basis! Good times, ain't it? Keep up the outstanding work! Your efforts on behalf of the wiki is greatly appreciated, and has not gone unnoticed!
Let me make this clearer as I realize the policy has become confusing because our admins have conflicting views. Leave all superscriptions alone where they already exist. All pages newly created going forward will not be using them at all. But those that already exist are to be left as is. When you edit a page where they already exist, and you make an edit adding a number (say writing VI Legion where it didn't exist before) you CAN add the superscription so that the page remains consistent. I just don't want them added to any pages we create moving forward. It's not my preferred outcome, but it's the compromise we arrived at, and I don't want our editors wasting time redoing so many pages. If you need more guidance let me know. Thanks for your effort. Montonius (talk) 04:10, December 9, 2016 (UTC)
Please be careful in changing the spelling of words. "Phenomenon" and "climactic" were changed to mispelled words in the Red Hunters article. If you do not recognise the spelling of an unusual word, please spell check it before making the change. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 07:35, January 12, 2017 (UTC)
Generally past tense is fine as long as everything in the section is written in the same tense one way or the other. Just be aware that those sections are generally written in the same tense that appears in the Games Workshop materials from which they are drawn. I can't give you a general rule because of this; pick what works best in the context of what you're seeing in the article. The only rule is make it consistent across the whole article then, and make sure that any tense changes you make do not cause any loss of information.
One other thing; I need to clarify the use of capitalisations for fortress-monastery. It should be treated according to the rules for proper nouns, i.e., The Crimson Fist (or Crimson Fists') Fortress-Monastery, but the fortress-monastery of the Crimson Fists. The term is only capitalised when used as a proper noun, which is what I meant when we discussed this before; I'm sorry I was not clearer. For a better illustration of this, the changes I made that you altered today were correct usage, and I have restored them so that you might use them as an example. In general, you should only very rarely be capitalising the term. If you're still not sure, just look up the rules for proper nouns on the Internet and apply them to the term going forward, and that should be fine. Montonius (talk) 06:30, January 26, 2017 (UTC)
It is the singular. The Scythes of the Emperor IS a Chapter of Space Marines. The verb IS modifies the singular CHAPTER, not the title Scythes. Like much in current English, it sounds wrong when spoken but is gramatically correct.
Also, please do not remove sources. You removed a book with a similar title like Disciples and Apostles when they were separate books with intentionally similar titles. I really need you to start checking your edits more closely for these kinds of easily avoided errors, as this is forcing me to spend time to check your work. I must be able to trust that the type of standardisations and corrections you're doing requires no checking, because that slows me down a great deal to restore changes that should not have been made to pages I long ago edited. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 22:36, February 7, 2017 (UTC)
VooDoo 99% of your edits are fine; I should have made that clear; and you do a great job for someone working in a second language for unglamourous tasks that do have to be done for the wiki and are very important. I'm glad we have you doing the standardisation job. But it's not only about reading things over; if you're not sure about something, as with the Disciples-Apostles mix-up, use the Internet as a resource to fact check. In this instance, if I wasn't sure that one of the books was real, I would have typed both into the Internet and seen if both existed. Use all the tools at your disposal before making a decision, and if you have grammar questions, or questions about why I made a particular decision that you don't understand, please feel free to ask. I know it can be a pain in the ass, but what you're doing is vital for the wiki and it has paid off in producing a wiki that I believe is quite simply one of the highest quality on the Internet. Montonius (talk) 17:21, February 8, 2017 (UTC)
There are big improvements coming to the site, and I am going to need some more staff members who I can work with and have shown fidelity to our pretty strict formatting and quality standards. I'd like to offer you the chance to join the staff as a Moderator. This would require you to be willing to continue to follow our rules and guidelines in editing and creating content, and would lead to a closer collaboration with myself and our other main Admin, Algrim Whitefang. All that's necessary is a willingness to make regular contributions (i.e several times a week), take on some tasks as assigned by myself or the other Admins at certain times when the work load is heavy, and a willingness to take direction from myself and Algrim on new initiatives or content we are currently pushing. For now, nothing would change and you would have the opportunity to complete your standardisation project for both the Space Marine Chapters and the Chaos Space Marine warbands as you planned. If you're interested, I will then briing the idea to Algrim, If he agrees, we'll make you a Moderator. Look over the role of Admins and Mods on the main page if you want to know more about the role. Interested? Montonius (talk) 07:21, March 8, 2017 (UTC)
RE: Battle Barge / Gloriana-class Battleship
After re-reading the canon as stated in The Horus Heresy - Book Three: Extermination (Forge World Series) by Alan Bligh, "Warships of the Great Crusade," pg. 15 they are technically principal (or capital) class warships of the Battleship class variety. Of course there are many variants of this class which includes the Gloriana. It also goes on to explain about the development of the Battle Barge, which are not a single designation or class as such, but rather a term given to any variant or retrofit of battleship class hull modified and optimised for use by the Legiones Astartes specifically for Space Marine planetary assault and ship-to-ship boarding actions. So basically, the term battleship and battle-barge are often used interchangeably, and has been done so throughout the various canon sources as well as the HH novels. Therefore, I felt that they should be included on the Battle Barge article. I know it's kind of confusing, but it is what it is. Hopefully, I've shed some light on this often confusing topic.
Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 21:15, March 30, 2017 (UTC)
Promotion to Moderator
In recognition of your continuing contributions to the wiki in a very unrewarding job, you have been officially promoted to a Moderator of the Warhammer 40k Wiki and are now a member of the staff. Conmgratulations and keep up the good work! You now possess rollback capability so that you can rollback user's mistakes with a single click of the button. Use it wisely! Montonius (talk) 02:56, April 4, 2017 (UTC)
Angels of Fury
I was counting on you to keep an eye on problematic things like these! The thing is, the Codex: Space Marines of 5th Ed. does not state the battle's name. It's just a long list of conflicts that took place in 998.M41, each one of which is marked with a number on the galaxy map - not necessarily next to any recognisable location. In this case it takes place somewhere between Fenris and Ogrys, the 'ruined' homeworld of the Invaders. Maybe you'll know of a better way to include the info :/
PS: Congrats for your deserved promotion!
Do whatever is easiest for you, these are very large pages. However, doublecheck that after any chnages you make the text has not been altered (unless you're fixing an obviosu error) as I have already gone over these texts with a fine-tooth comb and made a number of changes from the source material. Thanks for your help. Montonius (talk) 21:51, April 26, 2017 (UTC)
Please do not alter the wording of articles I have already editied unless you are sure that it was a typo. If you think a word is incorrect, please look it up in an online dictionary first before altering it. Warhammer 40k writers often use archaic English terminology for effect that can seem unfamiliar but is not incorrect. Also, please never change measurements in an article from feet to metres -- they are dramatically different lengths, as a metre is equivalent to about three English feet. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 18:31, April 28, 2017 (UTC)
Helmet is modern, helm is archaic, going all the way back to Anglo-Saxon Old English. Helmet enters English from Norman-French and first appeared in Middle English in the Late Middle Ages, so I should say it is technically more modern ! LOL. Warhammer is written by overwhelmingly British authors. The older they are, the more prone they are to use Imperial measurements; the younger ones are good Europeans, and use metric. LOL. We use whatever the primary source for the article uses; I would use all metric myself for consistency's sake, but the source material is the source material, and so we used feet for this one. If you did the conversion that's one thing, but you cannot exchange one directly for the other; they mean very different things.
Thanks for the info. I have worked on some other wikis, but I understand that every wiki tends to have unique rules and styles. I'll try my best to adhere to the required standard. Lemonny3663 (talk) 20:37, April 30, 2017 (UTC)
It was mostly very good work.
One thing -- we don't use the British convention with quotation marks. We use double, not single quotation marks for everything except quotes within quotes, and commas should be INSIDE quotes, not outside. The American version was chosen because the British variant is more confusing and harder to infer meaning in complex quotes. Also, Compliance refers to Imperial Compliance so it should be capitalised, Warpspace is capitalised because the noun it is derived from -- "the Warp" -- is a proper noun. In general, I don't usually make errors in proper noun construction, so if I've capitalised it and proofed the page myself, it should be left intact. Of course, thank you for picking up the capitalisation of the Emperor's pronoun, but I never proofed the part of the page between the intro and the addition of the Gathering Storm material because of the page length. If you have questions on why something is capitalised and the answer is not immediately clear, please ask. English language fantasy literature like Warhammer often has non-standard proper noun rules because it's a created world.
Go ahead and do the copy/paste for the rest from the edits for the other pages using the same material, as you noted I have gone over it and everything should be fine. Thanks for your work! Montonius (talk) 17:52, May 2, 2017 (UTC)
Compliant is simply the adjectival form of Imperial Compliance. It is capitalised because one is in the state of Imperial Compliance. Since it is referring to a very specific meaning, not the general meaning of just compliance with someone's wishes but Compliant in the meaning of the specific policy, it would be capitalised. Again, fantasy literature and its very specific terms of art or mythological terminology.
Yes, the American version is very different from European practice with quotes, numbers (3,000), and measurements (feet, miles). We chose the variants that made English most readable, though this did obviously produce some dissonance. American practice in certain grammatical forms are better than their original and more archaic British forms. The same is true for spelling, but we chose to keep the British spelling to mantain the flavour of the original works, which are defiantly English (not even British to be honest) culturally -- neither American nor Teutonic in preference, no question! Montonius (talk) 22:15, May 2, 2017 (UTC)
Chapter Colour Scheme Picture
You want it at the start of the Chapter History section if it exists so that it does not run visually into the Infobox, which is why I moved it. If there is no Chapter History section, then nothing you can do about it. Montonius (talk) 20:37, May 8, 2017 (UTC)
Please don't remove an Admin's work from a page, as you did with the Primaris Space Marines; that's really not your role and can cause friction with the rest of the staff. Let me be the judge of other people's work and where it should be placed (and take the heat for disagreements!), that's my job as Lead Admin. You focus on your tasks, and if you have suggestions for alterations or improvements to a page prepared by an Admin, please bring that up to the relevant Admin on his Talk Page, and let them decide if they should be implemented, particularly if it's about their own work.
Unfortunately this is another piece of canon which has different answers and no definitive one. High Gothic and Low Gothic were very specific terms until the introduction of the Horus Heresy line. They started to just use the term "Terran Gothic" and didn't explain which of the Gothics that is. I am assuming that in that era, it refers to the pseudo-Latin High Gothic, and Low Gothic is the standard English used ten thousand years later, but that's an assumption that has yet to be confirmed. In the pages you are referring to, Arabic numerals SHOULD be Low Gothic and Roman numerals SHOULD be HIgh Gothic, BUT that isn't canon. So you pretty much cannot standardise it at this time and must leave it as is. I would also point out that on the Space Marine pages, those directions are also used by painters, and so they sometimes need the "real-world" equivalent names so the painter can know what to use. Again, no way to standardise that until Games Workshop makes more clear what these languages equate to within the in-universe fiction.
Oops, forgive me, when I wrote that, I meant to add a sentence before that one which states the Charnel Guard severing ties with the Maelstrom Warders. Then I was going to add the sentence "This action would inadvertently spare the Chapter from the horrors of the Badab War." I was about to write it but something came up and I had to leave in a hurry. Sorry about that, I guess I'll just stick to my wiki for now on.
I just spent over an hour on the Founding article, and when I went to publish my edits they were gone. Please, don't touch an article if someone else is editing it! I can't stress this enough...I just lost over an HOUR worth of work!
Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 07:52, May 30, 2017 (UTC)
In the future, please do not remove information from a page. If there is a problem with a section, tell me about it, and I'll make a decision about what can be changed or deleted, unless it's literally just something repeated twice word for word ona apage. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 20:05, June 6, 2017 (UTC)
Oh, well, that's what I'm talking about. If the text is literally IDENTICAL to a passage elsewhere on a page, you can, of course remove it. But it must be something that was accidentally copied in two places and the author probably missed removing it. Some of these pages have been worked over four, five times, and people forget that a piece of text may already have been copied into a different section of a very large article. Because many of our articles are so large, this can happen. So if you see identical passages, of course you can remove repetition, just make sure it is identical. Otherwise, ask me to take a look at it before we remove it. It may just need to be reworded or repurposed. In this case, the passages were not exactly IDENTICAL and the earlier passage could be repurposed for the article intro, which is just a summation of the article's main points. Since the article is very large, a reader won't even really remember the similarity very well by the time they get all the way down to that section, which actually introduces the Grey Knights' separate rank structure and leads out to pages of its own. Thanks for pointing out the problem. Montonius (talk) 05:05, June 7, 2017 (UTC)
You've noticed I've begun to red link the Chapter planets. In the beginning we didn't do that because most of them were simply one sentence throw-aways that had no information. But eventually the plan now is to add a page for every Chapter planet to the wiki...one day, when I can find the time. So the red links are preparation for that. Just to let you know the plan. Montonius (talk) 19:40, June 13, 2017 (UTC)
Choose the second category, the one with the most pages in it that is more grammatically correct with all capital letters. Put all the pages from the other category into it, and then remove EVERY page from the category you are discarding. Once this is done, tell me and I will delete the inferior category that should be empty by that point. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 04:58, June 21, 2017 (UTC)
I have a bit of an emergency job for you. I need you to help me with this task until its complete, then you can go back to your normal activities. I was on the Blood Ravens page and I noticed that the canon image of the Chapter colour scheme had been overwritten by one of Algrim Whitefang's very professional but ultimately non-canon images. I love his work, but they cannot be used to replace a canon image, only supplement it. While I was gone, he mistakenly did this on probably a great many Space Marine pages with formerly canon images. I need you to check ever page, and if the canon image was overwritten, please revert it, but not before downloading his upgrade image and then placing it in the gallery, while the canon image is restored as the Chapter Colour Scheme image.
To find out if a Chapter Colour Scheme image can be reverted click on it and then go to the History page. You will see if the image was overwritten by one of Algrim's updfated ones (the difference between them should be obvious, you can also check the Lexicanum as their canon images and ours should match for the same Chapter, though ours were probably a bit better cleaned up originally). If you have any quesitions please ask. This is a VERY important job; the lack of canon images in the Chapter Colour Scheme slot essentially destroys our credibility within the community, so I need this fixed as our number one priority. Unfortunately, I don't have time to do all of this myself and keep up with all the othe rthings that need to be fixed or upgraded every day, so if you could aid me in this, it'd be a great help. Go at a deliberate pace as you do your daily checks, but the quicker you can get through the whole Loyalist Space Marine list and check every Chapter Color Scheme image, the better off we'll be. I have done the first few as examples off the list. Unfortunately, when you revert an image, the wiki does not tell me you have done so, so you'll just have to tell me when you're done. If there are multiple image sin the revert list, please just revert to the last image in the last before the fan-made one, which should be the last canon image. This is a crucial job, so your aid is much appreciated.
Also, anywhere you see on a page or a Gallery, an obvious unofficial fan-made or noncanon image, like a cartoon or a fanmade Space Marine picture in a gallery, please delete it. The only fan-made images I ever want to see is Algrim's very professional images, and then only as supplements to the existing canon image. The days of fan-made imagery are over. Thanks!
RE: Chapter Colour Schemes
Hey VoODoO40K, those two Chapter's have already been reverted to the originals. So they're good to go.
Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 19:50, July 9, 2017 (UTC)
We have completed the upgrade of all wiki infoboxes and other cosmetic changes to fit our new format. As such, when you are going over the Space Marine Chaptrer pages, in addition to linking the Chapter homeworlds, you can now also add the name of their fortress-monastery, if there is one, to the infobox using this line in the Source editing mode:
| Fortress-Monastery =
Simply place it just below the Homeworld line and then fill in the name after the equals sign. In addition, please place any quote present on the page, if there is one, ABOVE the infobox, as this looks much better on the page with the new design. If you want to see an example, please look at the Exorcists page in the source editing mode, which is now open for you to view. These new infoboxes look much better, are far easier to read when packed with a lot of information and are much easier to read on cellphone screens, as smartphone users make up almost 50% of our user base. Thanks for all your help, you are invaluable to this upgrade process. Montonius (talk) 00:28, July 20, 2017 (UTC)
You have to add it EXACTLY as I have written it above in the Source mode or it will not work, capitalisations are meaningless, it's computer code. Just copy what I put above and paste it into the infobox below the Homeworld line. If a Chapter does not have a fortress-monastery named, yeah for consistency you can still add it, then just fill the line in as "Unknown". I will edit the first few to make sure the formatting is right and then you can go from there. Thanks! This is a real upgrade to our pages. Montonius (talk) 19:03, July 20, 2017 (UTC)
Legion of the Damned
Thanks so much for catching that! Neither we nor even the Lexicanum has any record of the Chapter. I think it's literally just a throw-away line in either the 6th Edition Legion of the Damned Codex or the 7th Edition Imperial Agents Codex. Try this: first ask Algrim, who wrote that section, if he can remember the source he used for it, and then we can look it up. If he can't remember, I think we just leave it as it is, because I don't think its worth the time searching line by line through all the sources on the page; we'll just never find it. Since even the Lex doesn't have it listed, I think it's just one of those throw-away quotes, but it's very frustrating. Thank you very much for finding that and helping with this, I know you're very busy and your time is also quite precious. Let me know what you think. Montonius (talk) 19:04, July 28, 2017 (UTC)
RE: Knights of the Flame
I try! ;-)
Algrim Whitefang, WH40K Wiki Senior Associate Administrator (talk) 20:16, July 29, 2017 (UTC)
could you please elaborate on what a sandbox is, i am still a rookie after all.
This has been updated again in 8th Edition. Can you highlight the relvant passages for me? (Just copy and paste them onto my Talk page and then I'll control-F and find them on the Black Templar's page's text.) I will harmonise them with the current canon from the new codex. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 00:08, August 31, 2017 (UTC)
Castellans of the Rift
No. the description is correct. The painting instructions given in the White Dwarf issue indicate that this Chapter's darker colour is not dark green but black. Whoever made the image screwed it up. But if you look at the painted miniature it is clearer that the dark colouring, particularly on the backpack, is intended to be black, not dark green. Thanks for the attention to detail! Montonius (talk) 01:33, October 11, 2017 (UTC)
Hi VooDoo, In American English a comma is used after. In British English, a comma is used before if there is text before the i.e. in the sequence; however, in both cases not using a comma at all is also acceptable. I would accept all of the variants as grammatically correct. Montonius (talk) 02:37, October 17, 2017 (UTC)
I wouldn't do that. Just leave it as you find it as long as it doesn't VIOLATE the grammar rules above. In truth, the American way is most logical, as it reads correctly, as there should be a pause in speech after saying "i.e." and then the list. That's why the comma is used, to mark the pause. However, any of the forms is acceptable, but if you want the least amount of work, just leave it as is. I believe it's correct using one of the above forms on most of the pages. Montonius (talk) 03:14, October 19, 2017 (UTC)
Hi VooDoo, Please remember to perform the image reversions on non-canon images. I just did one on the Storm Callers. Remember to check that the image is canon. Thanks!
Oh, it's simple. Cypher was imprisoned. No where in that source does it say it was in Khangba Marwu! People infer things all the time that are simply not true, but they wish it was. They call this "head canon." One of the most important things we do is make sure that what goes on the page is nothing more than exactly what it says in the source, no more, no less.Montonius (talk) 00:39, December 19, 2017 (UTC)
Flesh Eaters revision
Yes, I personally checked all the sources, and even added new ones (WD94 and all the 1st Ed. books), thanks to some help from Facebook groups. In none of them are cannibalism, Khorne worship, or ruthless brutality mentioned, nor could I locate any of the old quotes. I found it better to delete everything I could not find evidence for ^^
Much of the Flesh Eaters page had been mixed either with the extensive fan content about the Chapter that exists on a fan website or had been mixed up with material that was written about the Flesh TEARERS, not the Flesh EATERS. The Flesh Eaters page now accurtately reflects what is actually known about the Chapter in canon, which is almost nothing. The only thing i restored was the 3rd Founding attribution. I believe that is actually a true statement, and the Lexicanum also lists that Founding for the Chapter, but neither of us can remember the exact source. I'm willing to leave that fact in place without attribution at this point on both a hunch that it is correct and that the source will eventually come to light. Montonius (talk) 00:01, January 16, 2018 (UTC)
I've traced the 3rd F. attribution to a fanmade Index Astartes, and found no other evidence, so I've written again that their Founding remains unknown -- since they were active and combat worthy by 860.M33, they could have belonged to any Founding between the Second Founding (M31) and the "Fifth" (ca. 220.M33).
Also, Harbingers can be expanded with the info located in Codex: Eye of Terror (3rd Ed), To Cleanse the Stars (BFG) and Imperial Armour vol. II (2nd Ed) ^^
Space Marine Pictures
Unlocked. I wouldn't worry about how often you can work, real life always comes first. Just if you do choose to do a page or two, please remember to revert the images. This is more true on the Chapters after M in alphabetical order, which have not been as revised yet. I saw a lot of images that still needed to be revered in the Chapters that start with "S". LOL. Thanks. Montonius (talk) 23:51, February 16, 2018 (UTC)
Use of X as Possessive
When a word ends in x and is possessive, like Corax, it must use the full apostrophe "s" construction like any other word. Thus it is Corax's, not Corax'. The rule that no "s" is required is actually a grammatical error that has been passed around a lot for some reason, but is not actually correct. Montonius (talk) 18:52, April 27, 2018 (UTC)
In English, there are two ways to do possessives, an old way and a relatively "new" way which dates back to the 1970s. The first is what you probably know, just add an "'s" after every word, like "the car's" or the "pencil's". The second is if the word ends in "s." In the old way, you would add the apostrophe and s even if the word ended in s. After the 1970's it became allowable to just add only an apostrophe rather than the full apostrophe S, which is probably where the idea of not adding the "s" after the "X" mistakenly came from. But the possessive of "Corax", for instance is "Corax's." And you pronounce it as CORE-ax-ES. Montonius (talk) 19:28, April 28, 2018 (UTC)
Space Marine Chapter Colour Schemes
When you get a chance if you could go through the list of all the Space Marine Chapters and make sure that the image of the Chapter colour scheme is canon and not one of the photoshopped ones, that would be very helpful. Some have still been missed and need to be reverted. I've been finding them piece-meal, but a comprehensive effort needs to be made. Montonius (talk) 22:10, May 18, 2018 (UTC)
That's fine VooDoo. If you find an image you can't revert I think that's one that simply can't be reverted; in other words, if it can't be reverted that means there is nothing to revert it TOO. But if you run into one like that, just make me aware of it and I'll take a look. Thanks!Montonius (talk) 18:34, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
OK check my Talk page for Algrim's answer to your identified Chapters. I have fixed all of them as far as is possible to be canon so this is done for now. However, if you noticed any other pages with Chapter colour scheme images that need to be reverted to the original canon images, please do so yourself as you move along. Thanks very much for your efforts. Montonius (talk) 23:11, July 30, 2018 (UTC)
Please stop attaching the whole paragraph of the Marines Malevolent Chapter beliefs to the quote. There is a reason why I have corrected your changes to the article.
Its just an exception to the rule grammatically, don't worry about it. Also you DO need to check every edit you make for autoformatting, as that is part of the job, otherwise you're making me do it. However, this is a bug, not autoformatting, caused by the addition of Fandom's videos to our system. You only need to check on text or pictures placed just below quotes, as it is that code which causes the bug to occur. I am sorry for the inconvenience but until Fandom fixes it, it's something you have to watch out for when editing pages with quotes, but only on paragraphs or images directly below quotes.Montonius (talk) 19:59, September 4, 2018 (UTC)
It's a problem of subject-verb agreement combined with a conceptual problem. In English the verb must agree with the subject. "Silver Skulls" is plural and so must also have a plural verb which is "are" in this case. But the Silver Skulls IS a Chapter of Space Marines which would be treating the "Silver Skulls" as a singular CONCEPT which would then require the singular verb "is". I have gone back and forth on this and there is actually no perfectly right answer because this is an unusual English grammar case.
A grammar Nazi would probably apply the general rule. If the name of the Chapter is plural, it requires the plural form of the verb regardless of the concept. So Silver Skulls ARE a Chapter, etc. I can't decide, so I have generally just gone with what "sounds right" as a native English speaker. But the general rule is what I described and so should probably be applied that way.
It just irritates me a bit that the language doesn't really provide a clear rule for this situation, but English grammar can be very contradictory and more so when it comes to sci-fi/fantasy properties with made-up concepts. But I believe if we are being perfectly grammatically correct, we probably have to go with plural subject, plural form of the verb, and vice-versa.
If I make a change to an individual page, however, just accept it and don't worry about general applicability elsewhere. It means I'm indecisive and trying to choose what "sounds right." Sorry for the confusion VooDoo; you do a great job of maintaining consistency. Not your fault I'm screwing it up! ;)