User talk:Lord Lorne Walkier

Garviel Loken

Hello, I would like to see a screenshot of the text passage used as a source for the change of "power" to "force" sword, thanks. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 08:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Sure thing. My pleasure / passion.

https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoxUpiK9qYThiUQ5RfAb4KkBWQ9u

Pg 48 https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoxUpiK9qYThiUAzASsYIN54oe3h

Pg 100 https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoxUpiK9qYThiUMBK1rtaeYBX2af

Pg 160 https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoxUpiK9qYThiUGkmVbhYyrRmlNN

Pg 161 https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoxUpiK9qYThiUIY8QotyYIpEcod

Glad there is quality control in effect, Lord Inquisitor. This is proof Garvil is a psyker. This is controversial, I know.

Thanks for the screenshots. As a sidenote I do never concern myself with the question if sth is controversial or not - only if sth is actually stated in a source. Or not. Back to the issue. So your screenshots show that Rubio had a force sword. No problem with that. But what you did change was that Garviel Loken had that force sword. And not a power sword which might have belonged to Rubio at some point. So that is what we still need proof for. Weren't you the one who already asked me about this on discord? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 20:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

The sword in question is dropped, discarded by Rubio before he goes off to found the grey knights.

Pg 351 https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoxUpiK9qYThiUiUzoTWf-6YW4g_

Loken recovers it.

Pg 364 https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoxUpiK9qYThiUfyLbcOOvSg49Xd

This is detailed in the page already.

This is my first attempt to contribute to the Lexicanum. I'm unaware of any discord server, yet intrigued.

Please remember to sign your talk/ discussion contributions, thank you. Otherwise such discussions can become messy and confusing quickly, thank you. Simply type --~~~~ which will be automatically transformed into a time-stamped signature. Also using identions (increasing numbers of colons) for a better structure is highly recommended/ obligatory.

As to the force/power sword question your sources indeed seem to be quite clear on the issue. From memory I seem to recall that somebody cited the novel "Saturnine" as a source that it was power sword and not a force sword. If that is a legitimate claim I cannot check for the time being as said source is difficult to obtain. You wouldn't happen to have access to "Saturnine", too? If we indeed do have contradictory sources (a nice way to say "GW fucked it up again"), we have to mention the issue as detailed here.

More information on Discord can be found here. Somebody had very recently approached me there about the power/ force sword question, that is why I had already previously to this discussion here had a look at it.

--Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 06:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I wish i could get my hands on Saturnine. But I am not a cool kid. I have been begging for spoilers on this topic though. From what I'm hearing the force aspect is front and center. Loken uses the blade to dispatch the deamon host, Tormegeddon. I can't get anyone to give good enough proof to use here though. Most are resistant to the concept of Loken the psyker. As soon i can get a copy, I'll make sure to set the record straight.

Im not quite sure what you mean by "identions (increasing numbers of colons)". When I figure it out, I will comply. --Lord Lorne Walkier (talk) 08:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I am wondering when the burden of proof should shift to the power sword camp. If they can show Rubio's blade beinng described as mearly powered, then game on. He was not just psychic but a Codicier of the Ultramarines Legion. I am unaware of any Librarians who use non force weapons, not to say they can't. To me this is about resisting the idea Loken can use a force weapon, so the sword must not be. Im biased though. --Lord Lorne Walkier (talk) 00:21, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

The problem is that the Saturnine (superficially) seems genuine and respecting the citation rules, so simply removing it would be somehow bad practice. But I agree that proof should be delivered on the precise quote from that source. I will see if I can reconstruct who inserted that info in the first place and request clarification. Although for the future you can keep in mind that this is something you (or any other user) is also entitled to do, it is not a special admin prerogative. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 08:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Saturnine, pg. 418 (LE)

So I guess that settles that. You can proceed to include your sources and additions in the Loken article. I have just added a very small reference and changed the "power" to "force" sword in the Wargear section. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 13:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

By the way: It is more comfortable for everyone if you upload screenshots etc. for discussion into the Category: Images (Temporary files for projects). --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 14:09, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, will do. Thank you for you time and effort. To some, this change might seem petty. I know your concern is accuracy. I have been arguing for nearly 8 years Loken is a psyker, since Galaxy in Flames. A hard slog. This small change on this rightly respected repository of knowledge, is huge, for me. --Lord Lorne Walkier (talk) 16:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Improved accuracy is never petty, at least in my opinion. KazilDarkeye (talk) 17:16, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

There is no such thing as pettiness when accuracy is concerned, I concur. The more precise and checked, the better. As to the psyker question: I don't have an opinion, for me only explicitly written-out information is relevant. The same is true for the Lexicanum. So please keep that in mind should you ever feel tempted to write sth about this psyker direction into articles, thanks. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 20:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Indentions

: Text creates:

Text

:: Text creates:

Text

::: Text creates:

Text

:::: Text creates:

Text

etc. --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 08:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)