PDA

View Full Version : Lexicanum: a Warhammer-Wiki-Project



Inquisitor S.
12-06-2005, 17:32
Hello everybody!

I'd like to present you our Warhammer Fantasy/ Warhammer 40.000-Wiki-Project, which can be found at http://www.lexicanum.com .
Please do not regard this a simple advertisement, we are looking for writers, aficionados and, of course, also criticism regarding issues of improving the project.

Ok, what is the Lexicanum actually about:
The main goal of the Lexicanum is to become a most complete, unofficial encyclopedia written by fans. It is based on the successful online-database Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.com).
Everybody has the opportunity to participate, everybody can write new articles, improve or add more information to existing ones. In fact, a Wiki-Project solely relies on the participation of volunteers, if you notice something is missing, you should add it yourself, it's not like a website where you can expect that everything is done for you.

The Lexicanum actually consists of four Wikipedias: one for Warhammer Fantasy and one for Warhammer 40.000, and each of the systems is realized in English and German.
The German ones have already been started some weeks ago, and now, having changed some things, we think, that the English Lexicanum is ready to be launched. I'm sorry, that there still is no sample article in English available, but if you want to have a look, what can be done (although you may not understand, what's actually been written there), I recommend you
http://wh40k.lexicanum.de/wiki/Servor%C3%BCstung
http://wh40k.lexicanum.de/wiki/Space_Marine_%28Spiel%29
http://wh40k.lexicanum.de/wiki/Horus_H%C3%A4resie

Once again: we want to create a central database for all those informations existing, which, as you will be aware of, is currently scattered across several editions, out of print games and books, different systems etc. etc.

If you have any questions, problems, suggestions or wishes, please feel free to ask! :)

Inquisitor S.
(Sysop Lexicanum)

salty
12-06-2005, 17:36
This has already appeared in Random Musings, but it looks VERY cool! I really hope this works out, as it would be the ultimate resource.

Salty :)

EDIT: How did I not get that right the first time!?!

Inquisitor S.
12-06-2005, 17:41
I wasn't aware somebody had already posted the Lexicanum, as we just decided yesterday to distribute the news of the English edition.


Maybe a mod could kindly unite these two threads?

Kargos Bloodspit
12-06-2005, 17:44
Its probably best not to join them. The other thread became more of a dicussion of the legality of Lexicanum. Either way, its a really cool project, and I hope it works. It might be an idea of everyone on portent helped out a bit and wrote a few articles. I think someone in the other thread filled out a fair bit about the Ultramarines.

Inquisitor S.
12-06-2005, 17:48
Ok, I'll just read the other thread in case I can explain some thing or other.

We hope to attract many good writers, and sooner or later (depending upon time, work etc.) we will probably have some people to translate German articles into the Englisch Lex. and vice versa.

EDIT: well in fact there are 4 threads concerning the topic ;) Ok, this shall be new one, to answer all questions :D

Brimstone
12-06-2005, 17:53
I've closed the other two threads on this subject in favour of this one so all future discussions should go here.

I've also moved it to 40K background as it's more appropriate.

Inquisitor S.
12-06-2005, 17:58
Thx, I wasn't too sure where to place it correctly :)

EDIT: Ok, just read the other thread, and thought I'll say some things.

1.) The Damnatus guys: well... quite but not entirely correct. The webmaster of Sphärentor is the "guy from Damnatus", but Lexicanum is a project from Kriegshammer and Sphärentor which was mainly started by users vom Forenplanet. Not really important, but just to put things clear ;)

2.) Fluffbible: big parts were copied 1:1 -> clear violation of GWs IP policy
therefore: no rules, no copied texts from GW publications allowed on the Lexicanum, and everything else has to be labelled with the correct disclaimers. we do not intend to replace any of GW's books, so the articles should be summaries in your own words

3.) it is empty: of course it is, we just started it, and the content will grow with every contribution

4.) Contact: yes, this it not too clear at the moment, but we have opened threads in some big forums, where contact is possible, and in addition some persons have given their mail-adress on their user-page in the Lexicanum (just click on the name of the person)

5.) Mutual support: Forums and websites supporting the Lexicanum are included in a list on the start page. This "support" normally is something like publishing our "recruitment ads", or including Lexicanum banners etc. Nothing complicated ;)
On the German Wiki you can see what I mean in the paragraph "unterstützt von":
http://wh40k.lexicanum.de/wiki/Hauptseite

x-esiv-4c
12-06-2005, 18:17
Eh, as long as you stay away from the GW legal assassins. It really looks like a good project.

Inquisitor S.
12-06-2005, 18:21
We try everything possible to avoid conflict with the GW legal team. A guy from GW Germany had a look through the Lex. and said, that as long as we followed the IP-Rules it seems to be ok. Of course we will never get an official "ok" ;)

In as many cases as possible we try not to use artwork from GW and replace it it with works and miniatures painted by the Lexicanum users.

x-esiv-4c
12-06-2005, 18:25
Hm, are you sure would never recieve an official ok? Have you talked to their legal team about it at all?

Inquisitor S.
12-06-2005, 20:21
"official ok" = licensing and responsability of GW ;)

Inquisitor S.
18-06-2005, 00:57
In order to show you what an article can look like.

Sample article:
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Space_Marine_%28Game%29

Khaine's Messenger
18-06-2005, 02:21
I think an example that pertains more directly to the background would be helpful.

How much is meant to be lent to discussion or extrapolation rather than mere summary, by the way? *EDIT: or would that lend too much to being a so-called "replacement" for actual GW/BL products, thus bringing with it fears of IP problems?

Inquisitor S.
18-06-2005, 02:30
There will be a sample article with fluff, but it takes longer to translate, and with the 4 Wikis, there's plenty of work.
This sample article is meant to show users "technical aspects" like internal links, categorization, use of thumbnails, headlines etc. In this sense it makes no real difference what the actual content is.

Discussion? - Hm, no speculations or interpretations whatsoever. Stick to the bare facts.

Extrapolation? - Only facts.

Summary? In the sense that no important details are missing but that e.g. an epic fight which is described on a full page in the GW books would be cut down to "who" where" "when" "why" and "who won" (few sentences).

mielherne
18-06-2005, 19:35
It's maybe a good idee to post this on the warhammer FB Fluff topic also. Just to get those guys on the project.

Brother Munro
18-06-2005, 19:38
I think someone in the other thread filled out a fair bit about the Ultramarines.

That would be me ;)

I'll get around to doing more later (late June is looking pretty busy)

Inquisitor S.
18-06-2005, 19:39
I would post it there, but I don't know, if the Mods would appreciate such an action.

Inquisitor S.
09-07-2005, 20:49
Hello everybody :)

Maybe some of you would like to contribute to the QUOTES , an essential part of the Warhammer 40.000 Universe in my opinion.

We already collected some, but of course many more are still missing...

Here are the corresponding links:

Quotes Imperium (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Quotes_Imperium)
(sub-articles are linked there)

Quotes Eldar (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Quotes_Eldar)

Quotes Orks (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Quotes_Orks)

Quotes Chaos (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Quotes_Chaos)

Thoughts for the day (http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Thought_for_the_day)

As always: if you've got any questions, don't hesitate to ask them.

Brusilov
09-07-2005, 22:49
I would be willing to give some of my time to the writing of articles. I could work on the Imperium, which is what I know best.

What would be the place of things that have never been denied but have not made an appearance in 40k background for ages, like the origins of the Adeptus Mechanicus, or even worse the Star Child thingie?
It's never been denied, but never been confirmed either.

And what of certain time periods mentioned only in passing and in a very unclear manner? Like the DAoT technology, with regard to the existence of the Iron Men and Stone Men? This thing is really vague but important in laying out the foundation of the Imperium.

Inquisitor S.
09-07-2005, 23:00
Well... Some of these things may not have been definitely confirmed, but they are definitely mentioned in the original books from GW, therefore of course they are allowed in the Lexicanum. However it is necessary to add sentences like: this is not too clear etc. and you must write where you have extracted them from.

And, most important: always stick to the facts, never add speculations, that are not from GW.

Brusilov
09-07-2005, 23:16
A warning is fair enough.
Do you have to always site your sources? Like when you do an overview of the Imperium taking information from different sources (not to mention the fact that one of my major sources is +++censored by the Inquisition+++).

Khaine's Messenger
10-07-2005, 03:25
That was one of the problems with that heretical tome, wasn't it, brussie? That you couldn't really verify a lot of that info due to how many stewards it had before you? It would be best to only use stuff you can verify.

I still don't understand the purpose of this project, though. I'm going to wait to see how this plays out for a bit....

Brusilov
10-07-2005, 09:18
For the most part I know where these things come from, either because I own the books myself or I have read them at one point or another.
I was not going to challenge established things like the IA articles with older material (anyway it's usually less precise), I was more concerned about things that have not been published in a long time but has never been denied by GW: like the origins of the Mechanicus (the civil war on Mars, the worship of the machine, the explorator fleets), the Star Child (I'll defend that one to my last breath), the Slann information in RT, the Jokaero (mentioned but we don't know if they're still space orange orang outang)...

Should we consider that anything that has not been written over still holds true. Other things are stories written in the 3rd or 4th Ed. that are less detailed than the ones published before. I'm thinking of the Age of Apostasy story that is far less detailed in its current version (Liber Sororitas) than it was in the 2nd Ed. SoB Codex.

Inquisitor S.
10-07-2005, 11:56
I still don't understand the purpose of this project, though. I'm going to wait to see how this plays out for a bit....

Well, hard to guess what the purpose of an encyclopedia is ;)


Should we consider that anything that has not been written over still holds true.
Yes.


that is far less detailed in its current version

One of the reasons we started the Lexicanum...

Concerning your sources: unless it's commonly known material (means everybody knows it's true) it is very important, that one knows from which GW publication the information comes (otherwise one can not check if anybody is making things up ;))

Brusilov
10-07-2005, 12:25
This raises the question of what is common knowledge and what is not... Anyway, I think I might be very interested in working on that project.

Any topic in particular you want me to start working on?

Inquisitor S.
10-07-2005, 12:31
well, you can always write your sources ;) It is always better.

Well where to start... As the English Lexicanum is far behind the German at the moment (56 entries compared to 985) maybe you would like to start on more essenatial things like Marine Chapters, Impeial Guard or something like that. But, start wherever you want ;)

Brusilov
10-07-2005, 13:11
Ah the Imperial Guard... I'll have to restrain seriously from throwing in my own theories, because this is a subject I feel strongly about ;)

Inquisitor S.
10-07-2005, 13:13
Yes, but speculations are one's own thing, in an encyclopedia there's only room for facts.

Brusilov
10-07-2005, 14:19
I know that, and I will do my best to uphold such policy.

Xisor
10-07-2005, 18:58
So no room for an extensive article on the Demiurg then? :cries:

I did the article for them on Wikipedia itself, you may want to simply do an almost direct lift on it, or edit it as seen fit.


Demiurg (Warhammer 40,000)
In the tabletop miniature wargame Warhammer 40,000 Battlefleet Gothic, The Demiurg are a race of squat semi-humanoids, with notable traits shared with the typical Dwarf stereotype. For example they are avid miners, expert traders, in technological advance of humans at least and bear a particular hatred for Greenskins (Orks).

Particularly for the Demiurg it is noted that they reside on the far Eastern Fringe of the Galaxy and also found less often deep in the Cradle of the Galaxy (i.e. the Galactic Bulge see Bulge (astronomy)) They are an uncommon sight being almost purely space-borne in their massive and majestic Commerce Vessels. Their history is unconfirmed, as is their origins, intentions and current threat to others and all is at most shakily based on speculation.

The Demiurg appear to be affiliated in some way with the Tau, although it remains to be seen if Games Workshop will decide to transfer the Demiurg concept to the 40k line itself, or whether they will be left as a background race and for the specialist games like Battlefleet Gothic.

It is assumed that the Demiurg are the attempt to re-address the 'space dwarf' image that has not been present since the Squat race that was removed from the game for reasons of the company.

Inquisitor S.
10-07-2005, 19:02
Well I can't see anything wrong about this article? Or did I miss anything? Comments are allowed to some extent, as long as it becomes clear that they are comments.

But one won't expect much information on demiurg as there virtually is none (except what you already quoted any maybe some thing from BFG).

Khaine's Messenger
10-07-2005, 22:01
Well, hard to guess what the purpose of an encyclopedia is ;)

No, I'm just having trouble placing how the whole thing works without being a "replacement" for GW publications. This was one reason why the Fluff FAQ of old had to be expressly limited to only a few common topics...because otherwise it would probably turn into a verbatim copy of the Heretical Tome if not a decent summary (which from my PoV is exactly the same thing). For further example, I considered writing up an entry for the Iron Hands in Wiki back when someone suggested we do a wiki-raid and build up the 40k definitions...but I found that as I progressed, things were becoming almost verbatim like IA:IH. Maybe that's me, though.

I'd like to see more sample articles than a description of what came in the game box sets.... :p

Brusilov
10-07-2005, 22:18
I tried to write an article on the Commissars this afternoon and ran in the exact problem Messenger mentions. It simply did not work, I could not write anything decent... which was really frustrating I'll have to admit.

Inquisitor S.
11-07-2005, 19:52
I'd like to see more sample articles than a description of what came in the game box sets....
You don't happen to speak German, do you? ;) There would be plenty of examples in that Lexicanum.


It simply did not work, I could not write anything decent
Well actually is quite easy in my opinion. Leave out everything which is unnecessary (hundreds of words for "x killed y") and summarize all the important facts in your own words. Not the prosa like style of Black Library publications.

Brusilov
11-07-2005, 20:18
Hmm, I don't quite agree, if I were to write an article I would do it thoroughly, trying to mention in my own words the details that make the story, after all it's supposed to be an encyclopaedia and thus as exhaustive as possible no?

Inquisitor S.
11-07-2005, 22:31
after all it's supposed to be an encyclopaedia and thus as exhaustive as possible no?
Well, exhaustive in all the facts, but encyclopedias are not supposed to be tales or something similar.

Inquisitor S.
28-09-2006, 12:59
Hello again :)
I'd like to point out that there is a Lexicanum Forum (http://www.forenplanet.de/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=116) available now for general issues and (international) coordination. As we agreed on English as a consensus language there, this might be interesting for some people here. However please read the Forum rules (http://www.forenplanet.de/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17479) first, thank you :)

Matt_Windu
28-09-2006, 22:50
Lexicnaum is down for me at the moment. Is something wrong?

Inquisitor S.
28-09-2006, 22:54
The servers are down at the moment due to technical difficulties, I hope they will be up again ASAP.

Please check http://www.forenplanet.de/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17482 for updates, can't do more at the moment.