Sorry to bring this up again, but...
... what do we do with the strictly NuCanon information contained in that book? Shall we create a Lothal/legends article, for example? --LelalMekha (talk) 13:00, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- Nevermind, we did make a Lothal/Legends page. However, the book also mentions the Jedi Temple has become the Imperial Palace, which never happened in Legends. --LelalMekha (talk) 13:11, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- I removed the Legends category for now. I should have done it a few months back when I read up on how Ashoka Tano and the Lothal Rebels were mentioned in one of the articles for the game, but I never got around to it. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:17, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- But have we made an official decision as to how we should treat the lore from these books? There doesn't seem to be a good option. --LelalMekha (talk) 13:18, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- Not really. Probably the closest we're going to get is assume Legends unless something non-films appears that was directly from the Canon timeline. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:32, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- We'll have to come to a concrete decision soon, with so much Rebels content flooding FFG's content lately. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 13:35, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I'm under the impression that not enough editors are even interested in discussing this. We've had this conversation several times, but it always involves the same handful of Wookieepedians. It hardly makes a proper quorum, and sadly it never goes anywhere. --LelalMekha (talk) 13:40, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- Information from canon should be included in canon pages. If something is from Legends, it should be included in Legends pages. All of this Rebels content should be in canon pages. We shouldn't be creating Legends pages for things like the Lothal Jedi Temple. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 14:37, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- So, does that make Master Lodaka canon, for example? It's mentioned she was buried on Lothal. --LelalMekha (talk) 14:40, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- Problem is, we can't exactly include Legends sources into a Canon article, or vice versa. I see your point regarding this issue, but I'd argue that including Legends sources into Canon articles or Canon sources into Legends articles would be even worse. That's why it's probably better off if we create separate Legends tabs, at least that keeps it separate ESPECIALLY if the source doesn't even match up with the timeline. I guess regarding this issue, you can call me and possibly LelalMekha total segregationists. We've already got enough problems with people sourcing Canon materials in Legends tabs as it is. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 14:42, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- I agree with Brandon; Rebels is strictly canon. However, in some of the new FaD books, places like Tython are treated like IU legends, like they may or ,at not exist. This seems to place the books as canon, as well as the new books having Story Group credits in the front. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 14:53, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- Information from canon should be included in canon pages. If something is from Legends, it should be included in Legends pages. All of this Rebels content should be in canon pages. We shouldn't be creating Legends pages for things like the Lothal Jedi Temple. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 14:37, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I'm under the impression that not enough editors are even interested in discussing this. We've had this conversation several times, but it always involves the same handful of Wookieepedians. It hardly makes a proper quorum, and sadly it never goes anywhere. --LelalMekha (talk) 13:40, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- We'll have to come to a concrete decision soon, with so much Rebels content flooding FFG's content lately. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 13:35, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- Not really. Probably the closest we're going to get is assume Legends unless something non-films appears that was directly from the Canon timeline. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:32, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- But have we made an official decision as to how we should treat the lore from these books? There doesn't seem to be a good option. --LelalMekha (talk) 13:18, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- I removed the Legends category for now. I should have done it a few months back when I read up on how Ashoka Tano and the Lothal Rebels were mentioned in one of the articles for the game, but I never got around to it. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:17, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
I don't consider these to be Legends sources. I also don't consider them to be canon sources. Not everything is going to have a clear continuity. Some things simply exist in the meta, where they're going to pull from all parts of the Star Wars franchise. We should stop treating Fantasy Flight Games products as having any particular overall continuity. Then, we can look at each release and judge whether the information in it is canon or of it's Legends. In the case of Lothal, that's obvious canon. Look at Ciena Ree too, for example. Fantasy Flight Games created the official image for that character, which was touted on The Star Wars Show and by the Story Group as being the official look of her character. If we treated Fantasy Flight Games as strictly Legends, we'd have to create "Ciena Ree/Legends" for that image—which would clearly be wrong. So let's detach ourselves from the thinking of "Fantasy Flight Games is Legends" or "Fantasy Flight Games is canon," and instead look at the individual information within it so we can use common sense about where that information should go. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 14:54, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- A case by case basis does make sense. How would you consider places like Bardotta, which was created for TCW but showed up before the reboot? - AV-6R7Crew Pit 15:02, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- I'd treat it as canon. Only Wookieepedia treats TCW as both canon and Legends. That is not an actual official stance, just one created here (rightly or wrongly) for article management. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 15:13, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- There's also the problem with Canon stuff appearing in what are clearly Legends sources (eg, the AT-DP and the Lasan Suppression in Imperial Handbook). Unless they go completely on the segregation route and make explicit what side they are for, with absolutely NO inclusions of characters or events who were previously Legends exclusive characters (EXCEPT for if they were either in the original six films or The Clone Wars), we HAVE to do split articles, especially when we've already got enough of a problem regarding various users erroneously including Legends sources into Canon articles and vice versa (heck, we've even got several mix-ups just a few days ago that were reverted). I believe in total absolute segregation, with absolutely no lee-way with the explicit exception of instances where the sources are specifically confirmed to be both Canon and Legends. The way I see it, either we keep absolutely everything in split articles, or otherwise we have to merge them into one single article with canon and legends being done willy-nilly. Those are the only two paths. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 15:20, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- If there is confusion, then maybe we can make a stickied Senate Hall post where we can have this organized. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 15:23, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- Imperial Handbook is different since canon stuff slipped in but it was officially labeled as Legends—but let's not get started on that, please, because it's not relevant to this discussion. In the case of Fantasy Flight Games, they pull from all sources because it's more of a meta source, so canon-specific information can go in canon pages and Legends-specific info can go in Legends pages. That still maintains the division you're referring to, Weedle, just without applying a continuity to the overall product (since there is no continuity for it). - Brandon Rhea(talk) 15:27, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- Looks like we've got some pages to merge. I'll have to dig into my collection of FFG stuff when I get home. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 15:31, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- What of species descriptions, though? Enter the Unknown has, for example, a description of the Chiss, which we know have been canonized in Star Wars: Commander. --LelalMekha (talk) 21:44, June 7, 2016 (UTC)
- EtU predates the canon reboot; I don't think it was even reviewed by the SG if my copy of EotE is anything to go by. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 21:46, June 7, 2016 (UTC)
- As regards the Chiss in particular, my mistake. But the question remains in general. A better example: should we take at face value the species descriptions for the Aleena, Gungans, Bardottans and Devaronians given in Nexus of Power? --LelalMekha (talk) 21:53, June 7, 2016 (UTC)
- Bardottan culture was introduced in TCW, so I think it's mostly safe. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 21:56, June 7, 2016 (UTC)
- I think anything in Nexus of Power is safe unless it's explicitly/obviously Legends-only. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 22:10, June 7, 2016 (UTC)
- Bardottan culture was introduced in TCW, so I think it's mostly safe. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 21:56, June 7, 2016 (UTC)
- As regards the Chiss in particular, my mistake. But the question remains in general. A better example: should we take at face value the species descriptions for the Aleena, Gungans, Bardottans and Devaronians given in Nexus of Power? --LelalMekha (talk) 21:53, June 7, 2016 (UTC)
- EtU predates the canon reboot; I don't think it was even reviewed by the SG if my copy of EotE is anything to go by. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 21:46, June 7, 2016 (UTC)
- Imperial Handbook is different since canon stuff slipped in but it was officially labeled as Legends—but let's not get started on that, please, because it's not relevant to this discussion. In the case of Fantasy Flight Games, they pull from all sources because it's more of a meta source, so canon-specific information can go in canon pages and Legends-specific info can go in Legends pages. That still maintains the division you're referring to, Weedle, just without applying a continuity to the overall product (since there is no continuity for it). - Brandon Rhea(talk) 15:27, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- If there is confusion, then maybe we can make a stickied Senate Hall post where we can have this organized. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 15:23, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- There's also the problem with Canon stuff appearing in what are clearly Legends sources (eg, the AT-DP and the Lasan Suppression in Imperial Handbook). Unless they go completely on the segregation route and make explicit what side they are for, with absolutely NO inclusions of characters or events who were previously Legends exclusive characters (EXCEPT for if they were either in the original six films or The Clone Wars), we HAVE to do split articles, especially when we've already got enough of a problem regarding various users erroneously including Legends sources into Canon articles and vice versa (heck, we've even got several mix-ups just a few days ago that were reverted). I believe in total absolute segregation, with absolutely no lee-way with the explicit exception of instances where the sources are specifically confirmed to be both Canon and Legends. The way I see it, either we keep absolutely everything in split articles, or otherwise we have to merge them into one single article with canon and legends being done willy-nilly. Those are the only two paths. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 15:20, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
- I'd treat it as canon. Only Wookieepedia treats TCW as both canon and Legends. That is not an actual official stance, just one created here (rightly or wrongly) for article management. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 15:13, June 6, 2016 (UTC)
For reference (since other people have had questions about this since we made this decision), here is a good example of why FFGs shouldn't be blanket treated as Legends. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 03:19, June 9, 2016 (UTC)
- Us there a line of demarcation though? Stay on Target (Dec. 2014) includes the X-wing (obviously a canon vehicle), but it is clearly the Legends description. Corellian Premier
The Force will be with you always 15:35, June 15, 2016 (UTC)
- I'm planning on going through everything since the canon split at some point and making some kind of list of Canon, Legends and New elements in all of them, although it may be a while till I have the time due to other commitments. Out of interest, how are we treating entirely new articles from this book like Weik? Are they assumed to be canon? Ayrehead02 (talk) 11:04, June 16, 2016 (UTC)
Characters
Should the characters that are mentioned or appear in this for the first time be considered canon? Red Duel 18:19, September 19, 2018 (UTC)
Canonicity
Where's the line drawn? What's the rule for what is canon or legends in this book? --Potsk (talk) 12:19, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- See our policy on FFG material. UberSoldat93
(talk) 12:21, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
nonword
Anyone know what "Front chappracter art" (from the "Cover artists" section of the infobox) is supposed to mean? Neither the phrase "Front chapter art" nor "Front character art" makes any sense. Asithol (talk) 00:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC)