At the latest Mofference this past weekend, Wookieepedians discussed the canonicity of the grid coordinates found in The Essential Atlas. See the "COORD" column in the Atlas Online Companion for reference. Some people believed we should treat them as fully canonical, and some people were not so sure. The agreed-upon consensus was to send a formal Wookieepedia question to Daniel Wallace and/or Jason Fry, the Atlas authors, and ask them directly whether these coordinates should be treated as canon.
So, I'm creating this forum to make a request for someone who feels comfortable to come forward and volunteer to send the question to one or both of them. I believe, if need be, we can safely provide you with both of their e-mails. I can say from my own experience that Jason Fry is a very polite person who has dealt with Wookieepedians on several occasions and has great respect for our work here. He always seems happy to answer our questions. I've never interacted with Daniel Wallace myself, but I know others have, and he seems to be the same way. I'd send the questions myself, of course, but I actually just had Fry clear up a different canon matter for me in a series of fairly lengthy e-mails this week, so I'd prefer not to become too much of a nuisance to him. Thanks in advance. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 19:49, November 12, 2012 (UTC)
- I've talked with Dan in person and I'm sure he would be glad to clear anything like this up. I can also Facebook him the question. -- Riffsyphon1024 09:44, November 16, 2012 (UTC)
- Secondly, I would believe the grid is canonical, for it is referenced by Pablo Hidalgo in the Reader's Companion for every planet. -- Riffsyphon1024 09:45, November 16, 2012 (UTC)
- To clarify, I believe the question is not whether it is "canonical", but whether it is an in-universe or out-of-universe system. The answer to that question will determine whether we include the coordinates in the body of articles or leave them infobox-exclusive, which was the subject discussed at the Mofference. —MJ— Council Chambers 20:15, November 16, 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, that is correct. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 20:16, November 16, 2012 (UTC)
- To clarify, I believe the question is not whether it is "canonical", but whether it is an in-universe or out-of-universe system. The answer to that question will determine whether we include the coordinates in the body of articles or leave them infobox-exclusive, which was the subject discussed at the Mofference. —MJ— Council Chambers 20:15, November 16, 2012 (UTC)
- Secondly, I would believe the grid is canonical, for it is referenced by Pablo Hidalgo in the Reader's Companion for every planet. -- Riffsyphon1024 09:45, November 16, 2012 (UTC)
I'd be willing to email both of them, since there was something else that I wanted to ask Fry as well. I can ask them whether the grid coordinates were intended to be an out-of-universe concept or an in-universe one. (Does someone have their contact information?) CC7567 (talk) 20:58, November 16, 2012 (UTC)
- I e-mailed you, CC. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 21:34, November 16, 2012 (UTC)
I've contacted both; just waiting on replies now. CC7567 (talk) 04:47, November 27, 2012 (UTC)
| Source: E-mail | Attribution: CC7567 |
|
I wanted to ask you a question on behalf of Wookieepedia's community. For the grid coordinates that you and Jason Fry established for the Atlas and the Online Companion, we've been a little unsure as to how to treat them from an in-universe/out-of-universe perspective. Should they be treated as out-of-universe, e.g. just to be used for convenience when we as readers try to locate something on one of the extensive Atlas maps? Or would they be something also referred to in-universe, by galactic cartographers, navigation computers, etc. or any other subjects in the Star Wars galaxy that might use them? I hope my question is clear. I'm also asking Mr. Fry for clarification. | |
| Source: Email | Attribution: Daniel Wallace |
|
Hi [name removed] -- thanks for the note. I'm not sure how Jason would answer the question, but I feel as if we developed those more as an external reference for the book/map itself, not as an in-universe naming system. There's no reason why it couldn't work that way, however, but if I had to make a gut check I'd say no. | |
It sounds like we should be treating them as OOU, given that they weren't intended for IU purposes. I'm still waiting on a response from Jason Fry, so we'll see what he has to say. CC7567 (talk) 01:34, December 24, 2012 (UTC)
- So CC7567, have you received any further answer from Fry? I'm just asking this because I work very regularly with these grid coordinates, and would like to be updated with whatever info that is available ;) Winterz (talk) 21:57, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in response. The email account I was using didn't go through properly, and it took me until now to figure that out. (Some parts of the email have been removed for personal information.)
| Source: Email | Attribution: Jason Fry |
|
Hey [name removed] -- Good question re in-universe/out-of-universe. In remembering back to the Atlas's development (granted, it's been a while), I thought of the coordinates as just a handy reference for readers, which would make them out-of-universe, at least in my mind. But it's also true that they appear on multiple maps in the book and the book itself never breaks the fourth wall, if you will -- for example, there's no column for "source" in the appendix. So I'd say out of universe, but that's based on feel from several years ago, not a specific decision made by me, Dan, the editors or LFL. My apologies if that's a frustrating answer. […] Thanks and best, Jason | |
Looks like OOU is the way to go. Unless anyone has any qualms, I'll go ahead and draft a CT within the next few days. CC7567 (talk) 22:14, February 3, 2013 (UTC)