Talk:Canon

Lucas
Leland Chee says that TV is high in canon due to involvement with George Lucas. What happens when Lucas is heavily involved with a C-canon source? does it become higher in canon or is it still the same? User: 1705jallen
 * The Clone Wars animated series, both the 03 and 08 series, plus the new live-action series coming out in 2010, are all T-canon. Everything else shown on tv is c-canon as far as the definition for each goes at this point. However since we can't sit down with Lucas and find what what parts came from him and which ones aren't, we just assume its all c-canon. That is unless you got a reliable and specific source that says Lucas said it. Thats my opinion though. KellTainer 12:48, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Star Wars: Clone Wars (Clone Wars 2003) animated series is C-canon.-- Darth Paulus [[Image:JaingHead.svg|20px]] ( May the Force serve you well! ) 13:11, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ponder this if you would. How can anything that conflicts with the original STAR WARS from 1977 be considered "canon"? If you undermine the original sources/reasons for why we are here, does not the rest of continuity/history unravel? Shouldn't we be more focused on history, is this not an encyclopedia? What would the STAR WARS phenomenon be if there was no movie in 1977? Should not the oldest events in this franchise carry the most weight? -- Frank V Bonura  - The Bane of Revisionism 15:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of the contradictions at your webpage are talked and solved on Talk pages. These are contradicting only at first look, but if you think about it harder, you could solve ot, and only a very few of them remains. Darth Morrt 15:23, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * What does that have to do with the questions I have asked? I am asking questions so this membership will think about our role here.
 * I'm not sure I understand your question right. The article says what's canon about. Star Wars not always works like history in real life. There are mistakes in the original trilogy that bore conflicts and later were solved. There are no unsolved conflict in the original trilogy. Some explaination may sound silly, but not directly contradicting. On the other hand, looking it historycally, the prequel should be true in the prequel events because they are happening there. In the Original some old mans are speaking about past event, and they can do mistake.Darth Morrt 15:53, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Um, if that were the case, then neither Episodes V nor VI would be canon. Darth Anakin 15:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Is that a problem? Is not the truthful, accurate, and unbiased preservation of history more important? Are we not here to chronicle and catalog the truth, the real truth, the whole truth, about the STAR WARS phenomenon? Should George Lucas' biases of history bias this membership's ability to report or should we be allowed the freedom to report SW history as accurately as humanly possible. -- Frank V Bonura  - The Bane of Revisionism 15:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The former dates that are inaccurate today are mentioned in the Behind the Scenes sections. So they won't lost in the history.Darth Morrt 15:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Why are the old dates wrong and the new ones right? Is the job of a Prequel, by definition, supposed to harmonize with the older source material? If that is so, by definiton, are not the old dates right and the new dates revisionism? Why not call things for what they truly are? -- Frank V Bonura  - The Bane of Revisionism 15:41, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You are right, but people do mistake. In star wars, always the newest date is the correct, because every other media will use the newest dates.Darth Morrt 15:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC)