Talk:Space Marine (Warhammer 40,000)/Archive 4

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Unfortunately, despite years of effort to encourage editors to approach the subject from an out-of-universe perspective, as of today this article still consisted almost entirely of material drawn entirely from the 40k sourcebooks. It was heavily trimmed on July 2008 (here's how it was before) in an effort to improve this, but that hasn't been forthcoming; instead, editors have continued to add more in-universe material in a piecemeal fashion. In the end, the only way to prevent that from happening seems to be to remove all of the in-universe material and start with a core which is purely from a real-world perspective. I've now done that. Editors who wish to read about the intricacies of the various Chapters, how the Horus Heresy went down and so forth are encouraged to visit any of the large number of lively external wikis which deal with 40k now: a simple web search for "40k wiki" returns plenty of excellent resources. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 19:18, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Isn't this crusade happening to all fictional articles? I commonly see this problem in articles that have to do with Star Wars, Harry Potter, etc. even though both those universes have excellent wikis. Leonnatus (talk) 21:51, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

An IP unilaterally undid this without so much as a comment on talk. I have now re-performed this reduction. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 14:50, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

And again, an entirely new user this time. The next step will be an RfC. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 18:36, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I find it rather ironic that Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) complains about the removal of his reversions "without so much as a comment on talk" while he himself is prepared to remove large swathes of the article (including factual material he insists should be included) without first discussing the issue. An entry on the talk page is rather too late if you have already removed the elements of the article it refers to! If you feel the article should be more factual, then be prepared to do the surgical work yourself. Do not simply remove large parts of the article arbitrarily and expect others not to also arbitrarily return it to its previous state.

If the article is to be amended, then please do so conscientiously. A RfC would be welcome if it brings balance to any future revisions. Gareth544 (talk) 15:51, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

The issue was discussed at length way back in November 2007. Nothing whatsoever has changed there: the content that is getting added back to these articles is still 100% fancruft, either plot content or game trivia. There are external wikis (dozens of them by now) which do not have Wikipedia's standards of reliable secondary sourcing, nor guidelines on in-universe material. Editors are encouraged to go there for this sort of content, as it will never be appropriate here and will from time to time be removed in line without our content guidelines. Should a future RfC be raised, it will be for blanket semiprotection of these articles to dissuade casual editors from wasting their time. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

While the topic may have been discussed at length at the link above, this was a general discussion on W40K, and not specifically relating to this article. It should also be noted that no consensus was reached in it as to the way forward in revising W40K articles, even amongst the administrators who commented, and so any major revision to this article could be regarded as unilateral. It is also dubious that the majority of contributors to this article are aware of this general discussion. If an RfC is to be raised in order to provide blanket semi-protection and “dissuade casual editors” then the process should first be explained and discussed here prior to implementation, as the “casual editor” will not necessarily realise that his efforts may be in vain if the only discussion is in a relatively unknown location.

Therefore my original comment stands; Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) should not be complaining that his change has been reverted without the IP first posting a comment on this site, when he too has failed to initiate a discussion here on this specific article before implementing a major change himself. All a bit too hypocritical in my opinion.

In addition, if Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) took the time to read the article, he would see that he removed links and references to the factual, real world, basis for the Space Marines and their organisation, not just the “100% fancruft” claimed. This information should be retained, with further referencing and editing if necessary, and not unilaterally removed. Gareth544 (talk) 20:50, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello, all. Just an anonymous 40K loving do-gooder who trimmed down and cleaned up the intro to the article. I hope it merits a removal of the template above the article saying this part needs to be rewritten. I don't feel I have the authority to do that myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.7.17.249 (talk) 03:58, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Regarding recent Loyalist/Traitor Legions vs. Chapters edit wars:

At the time of the Horus Heresy, the Space Marines were organized into huge _Legions_. They were split into _Chapters_ after the Loyal/Traitor conflict. Thus, the founding Space Marine divisions are properly called "Legions". --Demonkoryu (talk) 09:45, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Space marines first existed as Legions. After the Heresy most of them were split into chapters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonnatus (talk • contribs) 19:34, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

"Dawn of War's Blood Ravens Chapter are the most heavily explored. They feature in every Dawn of War game _and the third-person shooter Space Marine_" - what? In "Warhammer 40.000 Space Marine" the game main characters are Ultramarines, not Blood Ravens. So is that wrong or are there other Blood Ravens there? Possibly in the finale of the game? But for what I remember, there's an Inquisition, not Blood Ravens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.183.216.226 (talk) 23:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I was wrong, there are Blood Ravens before the game's final battle in the Orbital Spire. They arrived with the fleet probably as a vanguard, and help the Ultramarine protagonist fight the forces of Chaos on a grand bridge. So, my bad. Though I'd think about rephrasing the text - it may suggest that Blood Ravens are starring the Space Marine game as they do in Dawn of War, and Dawn of War II. 178.183.234.71 (talk) 22:47, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if makers of this game are aware (probably are...), but the U sign for ultramarines is practically identical to the symbol for Croatian World War 2 genocidal nazi movement Ustashe - guilty for hundreds of thousands of deaths of human beings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.212.134 (talk) 21:37, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

"Practically Identical"? You Decide...

• 
  Ustaše Symbol
• 
  Ultramarine Symbol
• 
  Omega Symbol

Not sure what you're trying to insinuate here, but the only similarity between the sign for the Ustaše and the Ultramarines is the fact that they both abreviate their symbol to a 'U', as do many other world-wide companies and organisations (do a Google search to confirm), and in this they are quite differently styled. Not overlooking the fact that the Ustaše symbol also has a grenade in the centre, I think you'll find that the Ultramarines' symbol is based on the inverted Greek letter Omega, which dates back thousands of years. This is in keeping with much of the Space Marines' fictional styling, and does not have the sinister undertones you suggest above. Gareth544 (talk) 13:01, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Just saying... nothing more. Type: 'ustaski grafiti' in Google images. You decide. View the game trailer (ultramarines warhammer 40000) on Youtube. Symbolisms observed in the trailer are Ustahe ideals (empire (reich in German, or even Austro-hungarian empire and emperor), Teutonic knights, Roman / Roman Catholic banners and symbols, religious phrases ("Burn heretics!" - alluding to non-Roman Catholic Christians - never mind Christian movement originally being an opposition to ancient Roman state - whatever) and religious motives, Nazi (associated, but not limited to) symbols with eagle wings spread wide, holocaust associations, skulls, U symbol on forehead of the ultramarines (dead-giveaway of intentionality), use of word 'ultra' pointing to ultranationalism and bizarre ultranationalist delusions/fixations in general etc.). Come to think of it - it is a comical situation - proving something so plainly and trivially obvious. ...Every violent ideology is pure senseless bull', absurd and, in essence, pointless; there are only two sides in the whole world: those who seek bloodshed (all of them regardless of sides - they are all one side) and regular people - on the other side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.212.134 (talk) 23:34, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I think you're reading too much into any symbology used by the creators, and missing the very obvious point that as the Ultramarines are based on ancient Greek and Roman culture (this is stated in the main Space Marines article - have you even read it?), and many Fascist paties take their similarities from ancient Rome (Fascism was, after all, founded in Italy), it is not suprising that you can identify similarities between the two (the 40K Empire of Man is based on the Roman Empire and the Space Marines on Roman Legionarries, not the 3rd Reich or Teutonic Knights, and hence you get the Imperial Roman Eagle used by both Space Marines and the Nazis). This does not mean that the creators of the Ultramarines based their symbology on the Ustaše, just that both have a common ancestor.

Additionally, ultramarine is a colour, not a decalration of ultarnationalism or the like; again you are being selective with your anaologies here, or you could also quote ultrasound and Ultravox as also containing the world 'ultra' (or are you suggesting that Midge Ure is also an ultranationalist with bizarre delusions/fixations?). And I'm also pretty sure that the Ultramarines aren't referring to burning non-Catholics, as Catholicism does not even feature in the 40k universe. You need to take any similarities in the way it was meant - a fictional styling that has its roots in the Classical civilisations of Rome and Greece - and stop reading nefarious connotations into it all. Gareth544 (talk) 21:11, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Word heretic is in connection with medieval age and not classical Rome/Greece; and: characters from the game carry swords and armor clearly inspired by medieval-style ones, yet you said it has nothing to do with Teutonic knights... come on. :) (Plus - on the shoulder armor some of the characters have purely decorative riveting - resembling checkerboard - now look at the flag of Croatia.) It is waaaaay too obvious to negate it... and it is actually irrelevant - it resembles nazi ideology and Ustashe - all aside that in itself is enough. Those stories in the game are just some false explanations with purpose to avoid (diverge attention from) what is otherwise obvious. Clear analogy of that (to compare it to what's going on there) is in the case of the 'ultramarine' word - yes, ultramarine is a color, and you read it like that, but it is known to everyone that the essential meaning of that word here is not a noun for a color but something else - a soldier - a marine with prefix ultra (and that is something completely different from a word for a color; whole other subject being in the fact that they talk (obviously fantasize) about scientific realization of nazi ideology - engineering super-humans - 'Übermenschen'; it's too obvious - why am I explaining this - this is a hilarious situation right here). That example demonstrates what is going on there - someone had nazi Ustashe epic/sci-fi fantasies, and created entire saga of it - but as such it was unfit for commercial exploitation because it is based on nazi ideology - solution: to make a false story to explain it, at the same time keeping all the imagery and essence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.212.134 (talk) 23:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Three points:

1. Heresy comes from the ancient Greek word, meaning 'choice'. Even when connected with Christianity, this dates back to the 2nd Century AD, so predates the medieval period you refer to by some time. Even if not used in its current form in the Classical Greek era, it was certainly used by the Romans.

2. Red and white chekerboard patterns are not limited to Croatia. It has also been used for centuries by various Scottish Regiments, such as the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, and is still in use with the Polish Air Force.

• 
  Argyle & Sutherland Highlanders' Flash

3. I'm not sure how you can state that Space Marine weapons and armour is based on that of the Teutonic Knights. For a start, even if correct in your similarities, the Teutonic Knights were not the sole knightly order in the medieval period (but they alone meet your Nazi connections requirement, so you bring them up). However, to me, the Space Marines' armour looks more like a Stormtrooper's or similar (or are these too 'copied' from the Teutonic Knights in your opinion?).

You really do need to look outside your narrow view of this subject and realise that your arguments could be applied to many other innocuous themes (for example

translates as Superman - are you accusing DC Comics of Nazi sentiment too, especially as both of Superman's creators were Jewish?!). Not everything revolves around the Ustaše you know, and not everything that mentions Supermen (or 'Ultra-Marines' in this case) is a reference to the Nazis. Remember that there are another 19 Space Marine Legions created at the same time by Games Workshop; are they all affiliated to the Nazis and the Ustaše, or is it just the Ultramarines that are secret Fascists?

Also, is there a reaon you keep removing your details from below your comments when they are added by others? Is there some reason you wish to remain unatributed and anonymous? I've re-added them to delineate the flow of this discussion, but no doubt you'll remove them again. Gareth544 (talk) 18:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

It's pointless what you say. It completely does not matter that it can be associated to what you said - the only thing that matters are common knowledge associations.

Yea' right - common people think about origin of the word 'heretic' - ha ha - they associate that word to what it is commonly associated with - medieval age. That's it. End of story. All else is irrelevant.

No explanation you give can turn what is plainly visible and observable into something else. What? - you would say that people don't see what they see, and that it is something else than what they see because, you see, such and such. Your explanations are pointless.

Regarding the signature: What is the subject here? - The Ultramarines, or any specific contributor this or that? What are we talking about really? Obviously we speak about Ultramarines. Then: the question is: why would it be SO necessary here that these discussion contributor informations are shown...

You consciously search for alternative explanations - there's intention in there. As I said: those things you mention really don't matter. General population is not into etymology and specific historical details which are innumerable and known mainly to scholars. Plain first-hand association. It *>IS<* what general people can associate it with without any special knowledge - first glance and from popular media - without any further knowledge. That's that.

As with the example of the word 'Ultramarines' - you play naive and talk about colors, while it is plainly and trivially known to you that the MAIN idea is in 'marine with prefix ultra'. T.H.E. S.A.M.E. routine is with everything else you are talking about. THAT is all there is to understand here.

They talk about destroying alien races (some in-game voices even have German accent). Of course - you see - it's not on Earth that they are going around killing other races - no - you see I'm wrong - you see - it's up in space! Yea' - alien races - yea' - extraterrestrials you see. Um-hum. Symbolism is what REALLY matters here, not the blunt story taken literally. Getting young people used to idea first of all. Setting a mindset.

...And: How come you always used correct (native) spelling of the word Ustashe?... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.216.116.154 (talk) 16:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Christ. If you aren't aware of it, the Imperium of Man is as fascist an empire as it can get. That doesn't mean that GW promotes or endorses fascism. It is over the top in such a comical way that canon material itself is often self-ironic to the point of sarcasm. It's quite clear to everyone except you. --Demonkoryu (talk) 16:29, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Fascist marketing. :/ Whether or not it's over-the-top doesn't matter. Yea' right - kids can differentiate what's over-the-top and sarcastic and what's plain message... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.216.116.154 (talk) 17:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

This isn't for kids. It's for a mature audience. --Demonkoryu (talk) 09:21, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

You're ranting now, and not making much sense:

1. You're now claiming that depicting the destruction of aliens is Fascist too?! So that must include

by this rationale then...

2. I use the "correct" spelling of Ustaše because just that - it is correct (as per the English Wikipedia spelling in the associated article)! You also fail to tackle any of the points I make (Superman, A&SH, Stormtroopers etc), and simply repeat your initial points ad nauseam.

3. Your argument that the general population asssociates Heresy with the

(who incidently had lost all real power in Europe by 1515 in any case), nor the full suits of armour they wore.

• 
  Reformation from C16th onwards.

Therefore, please put forward a logical, researched, coherent argument, or there is no point in discussing your suppositions further. You are one person, with one opinion, so can not reliably comment on what the "general population" know or think, only what you think, especially as consensus on this page is already going against you!

As you seem to be unaware, the contributor's 'signature' block is important as it shows the flow of the discussion, including the order that comments were added and by whom. As you have now broken the flow of this discussion and added comments out of date/time order, these become more important as it allows others to see at what point comments were made in relation to each other. If you feel this information is simply irrelevant to the debate, why do you then consistently remove any association to you? It is simple common courtesy to include it in your contributions on Wikipedia. Gareth544 (talk) 20:07, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what user 89.216.116.154 is trying to convey here either. From what I gather, user does not know what Warhammer 40k is, and is advocating a conspiracy theory about fascist marketing (?). Leonnatus (talk) 18:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

To sum it up: Type 'ustaski grafiti' in Google images - pay attention especially to how the U sign is stylized. Inform yourself on this page about WW2 genocidal Nazi Ustashe movement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usta%C5%A1e . Now see the Ultramarines Warhammer 40000 fight scene game cinematic (e.g. here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-co8eIfWXM ) - compare Ustashe graffiti to symbols on ultra-marines. Things become obvious regardless of attempts to detour from the subject (mentioning intentionally alternative associations and examples). I commented on the whole subject because I think there is an overall consensus of all people that Nazism (with all of its sub-movements), fascism (and racism and genocide) are bad things and not something to be glorified in any way - explicit or implicit, direct or indirect. My original intention was to simply point to the overwhelming number of undeniable similarities between what is seen in that game cinematic and ustashe ideology (especially paying attention to the immediate history (from the 1900's onward) inspiring Ustashe ideology). Whether someone in GW does something regarding those undeniable similarities or not is completely up to them - my goal was simply only to point to them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.212.134 (talk) 21:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I've had a look at the Google search user 94.189.212.134 profers above. Unfortunately the only graffiti shown by this search depicting a 'U' is modern, ie post 1991, and therefore after the Ultramarines were created by GW in

Yugoslave communist regime

.

So, far from proving that GW copied the Ustaše emblem for use by the Ultramarines, it seems that if copying did take place, then the modern, post-Yugoslavia version of the Ustaše copied GW! Unless anyone can find a picture that predates GW's use of the inverted Omega 'U' symbol, User 94.189.212.134/89.216.116.154's argument holds no water at even a basic level. Gareth544 (talk) 23:35, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

My ORIGINAL goal was simply only to point to those curious numerous ustashe similarities not to imply that they were intentional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.216.116.154 (talk) 21:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Only later it seemed strange enough that some people would go to such lengths to make such demanding media revolving around the theme of fascism, but disregard that - let's just stay at the similarities alone with nothing further - whether someone in GW does something regarding those numerous ustashe similarities or not is completely up to them. Simple as that. (as for ustase activities after WW2 - the 1968. terrorist act of a bomb detonated in a cinema in Belgrade was particularly notorious, their activities were building-up after 1974. and culminated toward the end of 1980s which lead to war in 1990s after the fall of the Berlin wall) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.216.116.154 (talk) 21:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, maybe I've jumped in 3 months late... I have had a look around at the Ustase article and this. The Ultramarines certainly go around killing aliens and anyone they don't like, a bit like the Ustase, but then again, lots of army and civilizations have done and still do that. Not all are Nazi influenced. Also, many of the alien races they target, like the Orks, Eldar and Tau are vey real threats to them, unprovoked or not, so they may indeed be overreacting by massacringthem, but thats how they respond to a threat, even if repulsive by today's standards. The Ultramarines most likely simply mean very good marines; Ultra meaningbetter than most at being Space Marines, which, being the main iconic chapter, they are. As for the symbols... the Ustase's name begins with U, so they could and did have a U as there symbol. The Ultramarines name begins wuth U... and they have an inverted omega like a U with very little resemblance to a normal capital U with a grenade in it. Games Workshop does not have to do anything at all with the Ustase similarities, nor does anyone want or expect them to. Any similarities are likely just coincidental, or borrowd to fit in the more dystopian evrioment, but a lot of things are borrowed: commisars (Soviets), eagle symbols (Rome), attemted genocide (Rome with druids- well sort of, Nazis with quite a lot of people, The Israeilite with the Amalekites... thats a few), superiority to everyone else (Romans to a degree, Nazis, Assyrians, in fact almost everone at some point). So not everything facist or genocidal is related to the Ustase and the similarities are either coincidental or superfical. 77.102.238.119 (talk) 08:54, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

To the guy who thinks the Ultramarines are based on the Ustashe, I think you're really dramatically overestimating the importance of Croatia to people who aren't Croatian. Honestly, the writers and artists never once thought about anything to do with Croatia when they were coming up with this because no one who isn't Croatian would ever do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.18.227.100 (talk) 02:05, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Wow that was kind of mean 82.18.227.100. Also why is this on the talk page? Darxide (talk) 17:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

If we are including in-universe "fluff", we may as well make sure it is correct; what are the sources for the text about Rogal Dorn, where it mentions him being asked to become emperor? Also, may I ask where, precisely, it mentions him possibly assuming command of the custodian guard?

I'm all for removing background information from the article, but until we do so we may as well make sure what we have is correct.

65.95.105.84 (talk) 03:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I know nothing about Warhammer, but i noticed the description of space marines as monks. That claim is not supported by their description. Do they live ascetic lifes full of prayer? Most medieval knight were religious, but it takes a lot more to earn the title of (warrior) monk. PizzaMan ♨♨♨ 19:49, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

@PizzaMan: They're not explicitly called warrior-monks in the lore, but their headquarters are called "fortress monasteries". They do indeed live ascetic lives full of prayer (when they're not fighting). Reference the sohei of Japan and the shaolin of China.Kurzon (talk) 07:33, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@Kurzon: Thanks for your reply. You seem to know the lore well. Could you perhaps add or suggest a reference? And let's add your example that they live in fortress monasteries.PizzaMan ♨♨♨ 21:15, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Third edition codices - either the Space Marine or the Dark Angels codex, not sure as it's been some years - had an entry on a Space Marine's daily routine. Basically one hour of personal time, four hours of sleep, several daily religious masses and the rest of it training. 85.11.106.154 (talk) 13:51, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Space Marine Pat David.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:23, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

) 09:32, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

) 09:32, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Dark Angels (Warhammer 40,000). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 21#Dark Angels (Warhammer 40,000) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Jontesta (talk) 19:58, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

There is WAY TOO MUCH fictional detail in this article. Wikipedia is about reality, not fiction. There is Wikia if you want to splurge on fictional details. I'm going to do some massive trimming. Kurzon (talk) 11:10, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• BlackLegionPlastic fiend.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• DeathGuardMarine.jpg
• ImperialFist2ndEd.jpg
• Space Wolves Hellblaster VirtualWolf.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:07, 16 November 2022 (UTC)