I am joining this wiki, as I have read 3 of the Dune books and enjoyed it much.

I have not watched any of the movies, however.

Assuming pattinson is joining in who do you all want to see play the other new characters of the story?

Paul having empty eye sockets after the stone burner attack is such a cool visual, I really hope we see it in the Villeneuve film. The miniseries just gave him black eye sockets and from what it sounds like the Lynch film was gonna do that too. Getting to see Timothee with prescient powers and missing eyes is such an awesome visual.

Right now, many pages have boxes that say 'For the character from the 2021 series, see...'. I think it would be good if we expended these to note the David lynch and miniseries versions too, as they now have distinct pages. Perhaps this could be expanded into a proper template like the one for different continuities. I wouldn't know how to go about this though. What do you guys reckon?

This afternoon/evening we played the great game of Dune together with friends. The Fremen/Emperor alliance took the victory. Can recommend it to everybody

For a while, no bookstores near me were stocking it and I hate buying books online because they always get creased. Excited to finish off the saga

John schoenherr illustration from the september 1969 issue of analog. Could be Hayt as the chapters included are focused on him but i find that hard to believe as it looks nothing like schoenherr's original illustration of Duncan

I still hold the opinion that 40k's Imperium is the cooler Imperium.

There is only one Emperor, brothers. He rots, wastes away on the Golden Throne, kept alive only by the sacrifice of millions of psykers. His arm reaches far and wide. None may hide from his sight; he will show you the way if you prove your loyalty.

More sad news as P. H. Moriarty, who played Gurney Halleck in the 2000 miniseries Frank Herbert's Dune and its 2003 follow-up Frank Herbert's Children of Dune, has died at age 86:

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Jaws actor P.H. Moriarty dies aged 86 | Metro News

Dune: Part Two has been nominated in five categories at the 97th Academy Awards. It is up for Best Picture, Best Cinematography, Best Production Design, Best Sound and Best Visual Effects.

Josh Brolin isn't happy that Denis Villeneuve isn't nominated for Best Director, though:

Josh Brolin Slams Denis Villeneuve Oscar Snub for Best Director

does anyone know what type of gun was on the ship that Paul and the Fremen girl shoot down with a missile launcher?

Currently, it is the policy of the Dune Wiki to keep pages separated by canon.

For most subjects, this means a minimum of three pages for information present in Original Dune, Expanded Dune, and the Dune Encyclopedia. However, this can expand to up to six pages including David Lynch's Dune, the two Sci Fi Channel miniseries, and Denis Villeneuve's current Dune cinematic universe (including Dune: Prophecy), and can go even higher if we include pages that cover the many video game canons and other apocryphal sources.

Naturally, in most of these cases it makes perfect sense to keep the pages separate, as the various iterations of characters can essentially be considered different people. Duncan Idaho has an entirely different biography in the Dune Encyclopedia than in Expanded Dune, for example.

But I'd like to propose that in some cases--particularly where the differences between canons are minimal, and perhaps even relevant to each other--it may work to the benefit of editors/readers to merge pages, making sub-sections for each canon. This will help editors by keeping page count down and making editing easier, and it will help readers by facilitating a streamlined user experience, not requiring them to hunt for information across multiple pages.

By way of example, let's say I'm a new Dune fan who has just watched the latest films and thought the ornithopters were really cool, and I want to learn more about them. I might go to the Dune Wiki and type in "ornithopter", but when I see the banner at the top of the page linking to the various canons, I decide I only want to read the "prime" canon (thinking that's what was represented in the movies), and so miss all of the information about Heart Scallops and all that wackiness simply because it isn't present on the page.

If our purpose is to help the public learn more about Dune in all its iterations, it doesn't make sense to me that in cases like this, we obscure information by requiring it to be read across multiple pages. Again, my proposal isn't that we merge every alternate canon page, but only those with one or two paragraphs worth of differences, or differences that are relevant to one another (in this example, the Heart Scallop might represent ornithopter technology from the biopunk era of the Scattering, showcasing how similar technologies change over time).

If this isn't an idea people support, I would at least like to propose that sub-sections be added to pages with links to the alternate canons, so if readers look for information on a single page, the layout makes it clear there is more to read elsewhere, with perhaps small one-paragraph summaries where relevant. This is something currently done on Halopedia to great effect.

We could easily implement a similar system here.

This was a bit of a long post, so my apologies, but hopefully it's enough to at least get people thinking/discussing ways to streamline things a bit for editors and readers. :) Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts!

Per our previous discussion on allowing fanart, consensus is in favor for allowing fanart on the wiki in certain situations.

This post is to discuss requirements and standards for the fanart itself. I've been calling this so-far-undefined list a Fanart Test as shorthand.

Here is a proposal for the Fanart Test / requirements and standards, in no particular order, based on our previous discussion:

• Permission - The wiki has permission from the creator. This permission should be documented on the file page.

• Caption - Fanart captions will always include "(fanart)".

• Description - There is enough description from the books to adequately represent the topic visually. (If there's not much of a description, then there's not enough for a useful visual representation.)

• Representation - The image adequately represents the topic as it's described in the books.

• For characters: Any notable physical features are represented, and their clothing is what they would typically wear. They should have a neutral expression, or an expression that they often have, e.g. a character who is often smiling or scowling is shown that way.

• Quality - Realistic(-ish) art style, i.e. not cutesy or cartoony or low-quality doodles.

• Alternatives - There is no alternative image from an adaptation that shows the topic as it's described in the books. (Adaptations take liberties -- which is fine, but sometimes they don't represent the book canon description. (ETA) It's still fine to display such images elsewhere on the page.)

• Canon distinction - For pages that have a separate page for an adaptation (such as a subpage for a film's version of a character), there's some effort to use a different image in the book canon's infobox. This is to avoid confusion between different canon pages on the same topic.

• Should fanart be considered? - The wiki page itself needs to pass a "should fanart be considered" test. See image for a suggestion:

• Thinking Machine Ban? - Something else that hasn't come up: the use of AI images. I suspect that the general consensus is similar to AI-generated text, which is that it should not be allowed. The Thinking Machine Ban can be extended to images with community consensus.

• Vector art - High quality vectors (such as for house sigils) can be used with community consensus, even if there are canon images available.

• Community discussion - Many image decisions may still come down to the community to decide what's best for an individual page. This may especially be necessary to begin with as we figure out what will work best for the wiki and we better define our policies. Alternatively, this could be an approval process, if enough members are interested.

• Unknown sources - As we enact whatever guidelines we decide, we will need to go through existing images that may not be adequately sourced, so we won't know if it's fanart or from an adaptation. In these cases, we can add "(source unknown, possibly fan art)" to the captions until we get confirmation or find a better image with a source.

• Fanart or fan art? Space or no space?

There may still be plenty of subjectivity for this, and further discussion will probably be necessary even after we come to some consensus on this topic.

Please comment on this post stating which parts you support or oppose, if any. Feel free to also suggest any additions, removals, or changes, or raise any questions or concerns. We touched on a lot in the previous discussion, so my apologies if I've missed anything -- but feel free to bring it up again.

Thank you, everyone! This is a group discussion for wiki standards and your input will help us decide how the wiki handles fanart going forward.