Jump to content

[Request] Reference picture feat the Primarks & Legions etc


CommandPoint

Recommended Posts

I've started listening through some of the 40k / Horus Heresy audiobooks and have often found myself confused as to who is who, or more importantly ~ remembering who is who.

 

Is anyone aware of a reference picture detailing each of the Primarks, their Legion number, Chapter, name, picture / description etc?

Sort of like a help sheet that I print off or have saved on my phone to easily look at as I read the stories.

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Space_Marine_Legion Scroll down to "Original Name and Appearances" Links to each individual Page will usually greet you with an image of their current incarnation but further down the articles you should find their 30k Art.

 

Same deal with the Primarchs all of their articles should have an Illustration of them.

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Space_Marine_Legion Scroll down to "Original Name and Appearances" Links to each individual Page will usually greet you with an image of their current incarnation but further down the articles you should find their 30k Art.

 

Same deal with the Primarchs all of their articles should have an Illustration of them.

and lexicanum isn't up-to date ... i prefere the 40k wiki over lexicanum (also, lexicanums community isn't the nicest ;>) ... also, all of the artwork in the 40k wiki is official now ...

Or we could use 1d4chan for a splash of Comedy... http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Primarch Note: Harsh Language and "Internet Speak" is aplenty as is semi-factual information used for the purposes of "Teh Lulz". You have been warned :p

 

That is not official. And full of borderline fan fiction.

It's actually been cleaned up a lot and it's quite well sourced now.

 

 

Many of their in-depth pages aren't well sourced, they're just typed out from the FW books, especially pages on the battles from Betrayal/Massacre/Extermination etc. I don't think a site like that should be supported.

A typical initiation requires all Primarchs and Legions to be memorized and recited while a match burns down. You can't let go of the match until you've finished in order :D

Dang it!

 

I always get stuck at number two...I can never remember his name or legion...

A typical initiation requires all Primarchs and Legions to be memorized and recited while a match burns down. You can't let go of the match until you've finished in order biggrin.png

Dang it!

I always get stuck at number two...I can never remember his name or legion...

Ha ha ha ha!

Well between Caliban, Colchis, Chogoris, Chemos, and Cthonia, my girlfriend's been having a hell of a time trying to keep the legions, primarchs, and homeworlds straight as she reads through the HH. Having them referenced by their legion number isn't helping.tongue.png

Well between Caliban, Colchis, Chogoris, Chemos, and Cthonia, my girlfriend's been having a hell of a time trying to keep the legions, primarchs, and homeworlds straight as she reads through the HH.  Having them referenced by their legion number isn't helping.:P

Today's Heresy Broadcast was brought to you by the letter C and the number 8.....

 

 

BECAUSE BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE!!!

I've started listening through some of the 40k / Horus Heresy audiobooks and have often found myself confused as to who is who, or more importantly ~ remembering who is who.

 

Is anyone aware of a reference picture detailing each of the Primarks, their Legion number, Chapter, name, picture / description etc?

Sort of like a help sheet that I print off or have saved on my phone to easily look at as I read the stories.

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

Honestly? The easiest, cheapest and quickest way to look at whatever character you need a visual of would be to use Lexicanum.com, type in the name of the Primarch/ character you want to see in the search bar, and 80% of the time, there will be a piece of art. If Lexi doesn't have it, then just Google it.

 

 

That is not official. And full of borderline fan fiction.

It's actually been cleaned up a lot and it's quite well sourced now.

 

 

Many of their in-depth pages aren't well sourced, they're just typed out from the FW books, especially pages on the battles from Betrayal/Massacre/Extermination etc. I don't think a site like that should be supported.

 

 

This is something which worries me with it. It's often plagiarism of codexes, BL books and FW texts, with no attempt to discern between the texts that might be glued together into an article and summarise instead. I fail my students for this, shouldn't we hold the writers of a wiki to a high standard too? Quotation marks are certainly acceptable :) I do write on it from time to time, but the length of articles and the resort to plagiarism worry me. (I also write for Memory Beta, the trek licensed products wiki, and wikipedia itself on occasion)

 

The lack of discernment obviously reflects  conflicting narratives and ideas found in various GW publications dating back to the late 80s, but rather than presenting that information as stemming from multiple publication sources and acknowledging these in-article, it takes on a deeply flawed omniscient perspective (i.e. often that of the third person narrator of a BL book) Yet it is also one that also assumes the persona of an imperial functionary. It's bizarre at its worst instances, since really, condensing but essentially repeating large sections of various novels (such as the final fight and elevation of Angel Exterminatus to name one) really makes for a cogent article.

 

It also stops articles from being analytic or investigative sometimes. I'm a historian, anything I write that isn't pure description will be analytic. I wonder if the admins adopted a more plagiaristic approach to avoid any fanon analysis? But using evidence and presenting ideas in a cohesive whole - that's part of an encyclopedia's role - to sift and discern. As an example I wish the legion and the chapter articles were far shorter and separated. It just seems highly flawed to me to assume that they are one and the same thing, across 10000 years! The worst offender is the Black Legion, which includes the Sons of Horus article. 

 

Finally, a distinct lack of dates makes the wiki deeply problematic too, since it often writes everything from a present tense, as though everything is happening at one and the same time. Whenever I edit an article this is my first aim - a date - since this is the core of historical process. 

 

However, there is a lot of good on the wiki too - it's an acceptable resource, and its admins do put a lot of effort into it. They are always civil and take care to listen (unlike other wikia site admins). I wouldn't say it's a super-open wiki - there are lots of rules to the wiki, some unspoken. Also it doesn't have the ambition for everything in 40k-dom to have its own page (with dates!), perhaps because there aren't that many writers - which is what I'd hope for in a 'pseudo-historical' encyclopaedia - but I'd say it's perfectly acceptable for the OP's need for images. 

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.