Fanon
Simon the Killer Ewok is Fanon —Unsigned comment by 195.93.21.69 (talk • contribs)
- No MoffRebus 14:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Simon appers in an offical lucusarts product he is indeed semi-cannon although since a code unlocked him he probably is infinites —Unsigned comment by 24.168.146.88 (talk • contribs)
All the information except him being a super fast, tough, and shielded Ewok with a rapid-fire blaster are fanon, I think. I'll fix that. Correct me if I'm wrong. — Aiddat (Holonet) (Contribs Log) 
16:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Simon is become death, the destroyer of worlds. Dark Ridley 18:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Canon status
Would this be a good way to make the guy's non-canonicity clearer? I was thinking of saying something about multiplayer too, but then I realized I don't actually know the status of that, and the last time I looked at Canon#Canon and games it was long and kind of a mess. --Andrew Nagy 03:54, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
- I just noticed something...Leland Chee said, "Simon the Killer Ewok is about as canon as the hyperkinetic rabbity thing, Max." Well, uh, based on that quote mentioned in The Dark Forces Saga, Max is apparently now canon. We've reached a problem. Darqlink51 23:05, September 20, 2009 (UTC)
- What's Leland's established position on Easter eggs? I consider Max canon because he's right there in Jedi Knight, but from what I understand other people disagree. --Andrew Nagy 04:50, September 22, 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure quite sure what his viewpoint is, but there is something in The Dark Forces Saga that establishes Kyle's meeting with Max as canon. You can find it in much more detail on the Max talkpage. I was just saying that since Leland just said that Simon is as canon as Max, and Max is now canon, does that mean that Simon is now canon? Darqlink51 17:54, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
- I am not sure what do you mean by saying "is now canon". Do you mean that Max was recently referred in an EU work, while he wasn't at the time Chee made his statement? Even if this is the case, that isn't enough to canonify him. Chee made the statement then; and referred to Simon's canonical status which was then identical to Max'. Simon and Max aren't connected in any way, so the canonification of the one doesn't affect the other. MoffRebusMy Talk 13:23, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
- If I might, about Rebus's post: Max was referred in an EU work, The Dark Forces Saga Part 1, in April 2005 — (which might or might not be enough to consider that Max is canon). Chee's statement is dated November 2006. Thus, when Chee spoke about Simon's canonical status as of 2006, he suggested Simon was as canon as a character who was canon then, if I understand Rebus's idea correctly? --Skippy Farlstendoiro 13:41, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
- Skippy, thank you, that's my idea exactly. One question is: can we assume that Chee knew that Max had been canonified due to the Dark Forces Saga and thus his statement about Simon is intentionally rendered? (Oh man, am I going to eat the flak tonight.)Darqlink51 23:21, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
- IMHO, it's Chee's job and thus responsability to know that; thus, even if he didn't know, his words would have made Simon canon. But then again, that's an opinion; we should search for a source confirmation or refutation of that. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 06:35, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
- That could be a problem. I don't know about him that well, but I assume personal contact with him is impossible. And there's not a lot of sources that talk about Simon, so finding one could prove difficult. Darqlink51 20:54, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
- IMHO, it's Chee's job and thus responsability to know that; thus, even if he didn't know, his words would have made Simon canon. But then again, that's an opinion; we should search for a source confirmation or refutation of that. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 06:35, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
- Skippy, thank you, that's my idea exactly. One question is: can we assume that Chee knew that Max had been canonified due to the Dark Forces Saga and thus his statement about Simon is intentionally rendered? (Oh man, am I going to eat the flak tonight.)Darqlink51 23:21, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
- If I might, about Rebus's post: Max was referred in an EU work, The Dark Forces Saga Part 1, in April 2005 — (which might or might not be enough to consider that Max is canon). Chee's statement is dated November 2006. Thus, when Chee spoke about Simon's canonical status as of 2006, he suggested Simon was as canon as a character who was canon then, if I understand Rebus's idea correctly? --Skippy Farlstendoiro 13:41, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
- "there is something in The Dark Forces Saga that establishes Kyle's meeting with Max as canon": What thing? As far as I know the only lagomorph meeting mentioned is at Kwenn, not in Baron's Hed; the lagomorph there is neither named nor described in detail. --Andrew Nagy
- If you read the Max page, however, you will note that it says: "Later, he teamed up with Katarn to hunt down Derrida, a spy who had taken refuge at the Kwenn Space Station. The pair were able to apprehend the Ketton agent, but nearly destroyed the station while doing so." Max was at Kwenn, so the unknown lagomorph is him. Darqlink51 11:35, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
- The Max page in The Dark Forces Saga? I assume you don't mean the one at Wookieepedia, since that's a fan creation with no status in canon. --Andrew Nagy 03:46, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- If you read the Max page, however, you will note that it says: "Later, he teamed up with Katarn to hunt down Derrida, a spy who had taken refuge at the Kwenn Space Station. The pair were able to apprehend the Ketton agent, but nearly destroyed the station while doing so." Max was at Kwenn, so the unknown lagomorph is him. Darqlink51 11:35, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
- I am not sure what do you mean by saying "is now canon". Do you mean that Max was recently referred in an EU work, while he wasn't at the time Chee made his statement? Even if this is the case, that isn't enough to canonify him. Chee made the statement then; and referred to Simon's canonical status which was then identical to Max'. Simon and Max aren't connected in any way, so the canonification of the one doesn't affect the other. MoffRebusMy Talk 13:23, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure quite sure what his viewpoint is, but there is something in The Dark Forces Saga that establishes Kyle's meeting with Max as canon. You can find it in much more detail on the Max talkpage. I was just saying that since Leland just said that Simon is as canon as Max, and Max is now canon, does that mean that Simon is now canon? Darqlink51 17:54, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
- Abel G. Peña says that IS intended to be Max. Thats NOT a fan creation. 98.148.109.6 04:19, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not aware that he ever said that; he doesn't in Deconstructing Dark Forces. But intent isn't canon either way. --Andrew Nagy 05:11, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, I did use the page on Wookieepedia under the natural assumption that we had gotten the facts straight. My apologies. A fictional universe created by human beings could never be so simple. Technically, what I said was incorrect. But how could the pint-sized lagomorph mentioned in the Saga *not* be Max? There aren't any other lagomorphs IN Dark Forces! I know we're supposed to look for solid wording here, but this is really delving into the realms of the ridiculous. And I know I'm already in the midst of being completely ridiculed here, but...is it possible that we're having this argument just because you're giving into a personal opinion that a joke character couldn't possibly fit into this flawless pocket of fiction?...Sorry, I did go off, but that's my honest thought. Darqlink51 16:01, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- Why would the Saga lagomorph have to be from Dark Forces? And I'll admit that I was forgetting the problem of the Dietz novels when I called Max canon, but as far as I know the existence of other canon joke characters is undisputed. --Andrew Nagy 18:21, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- Well, based on the fact that the Dark Forces Saga is about the Jedi Knights series which includes Dark Forces, I think the Saga lagomorph would have to be a certain one which appears in the Jedi Knights series (even then, if another rabbit-like person did appear, they would need a psychotic persona to add up)...on a lighter note, thanks for reminding me about Sha'a Gi! I had forgotten about him. Darqlink51 21:02, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- You've lost me, but there seems to be no consensus that the template should be added, which was the main point. --Andrew Nagy 21:37, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- I actually brought this up because it was under the label of "canon status". I have to apologize for the disorientation, and going off-topic. Shall I open a new portion for this debate, and return this to talking about the template? Again, I apologize, I can be pretty disorienting. Darqlink51 21:43, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- Whatever you think would be clearest, I guess. --Andrew Nagy 22:08, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- I actually brought this up because it was under the label of "canon status". I have to apologize for the disorientation, and going off-topic. Shall I open a new portion for this debate, and return this to talking about the template? Again, I apologize, I can be pretty disorienting. Darqlink51 21:43, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- You've lost me, but there seems to be no consensus that the template should be added, which was the main point. --Andrew Nagy 21:37, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- Well, based on the fact that the Dark Forces Saga is about the Jedi Knights series which includes Dark Forces, I think the Saga lagomorph would have to be a certain one which appears in the Jedi Knights series (even then, if another rabbit-like person did appear, they would need a psychotic persona to add up)...on a lighter note, thanks for reminding me about Sha'a Gi! I had forgotten about him. Darqlink51 21:02, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- Why would the Saga lagomorph have to be from Dark Forces? And I'll admit that I was forgetting the problem of the Dietz novels when I called Max canon, but as far as I know the existence of other canon joke characters is undisputed. --Andrew Nagy 18:21, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, I did use the page on Wookieepedia under the natural assumption that we had gotten the facts straight. My apologies. A fictional universe created by human beings could never be so simple. Technically, what I said was incorrect. But how could the pint-sized lagomorph mentioned in the Saga *not* be Max? There aren't any other lagomorphs IN Dark Forces! I know we're supposed to look for solid wording here, but this is really delving into the realms of the ridiculous. And I know I'm already in the midst of being completely ridiculed here, but...is it possible that we're having this argument just because you're giving into a personal opinion that a joke character couldn't possibly fit into this flawless pocket of fiction?...Sorry, I did go off, but that's my honest thought. Darqlink51 16:01, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not aware that he ever said that; he doesn't in Deconstructing Dark Forces. But intent isn't canon either way. --Andrew Nagy 05:11, October 4, 2009 (UTC)