Forum:SH:The Great EU Purge (New Canon;Legends discussion)

seriously are we not going to talk about this? Jennifer Heddle the Senior Edditor at Lucas Books said "It's all non-canon, but it all exists as a resource that could be used down the line."

This is kind of an important topic to dissucss since we now know the plans

General discussion
--DarthJon (talk) 14:38, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * It is indeed time to take our heads out of the sand. We now know for sure that the EU as we know it is a completely separate continuity from the nine films, The Clone Wars, and Rebels, and now is the time to discuss as a community and figure out as a community how we're going to proceed. Do we, for example, split Luke Skywalker into two articles (a canon article and a "Legends" article)? Do we relegate "Legends" to the Behind the scenes sections of characters/planets/situations/etc. that originated in the films? We have just over four months until the first book of the new continuity is released, and we need to figure out a gameplan before that time. Everyone's opinion is valid, and anyone with an idea is welcome to throw it out there.

My proposal is to tag EU-exclusive articles as "Legends;" possibly an image in the upper-right corner like we currently do with non-canon articles. Articles on things from the films could be split into two --- eg, Luke Skywalker and Luke Skywalker (Legends). Info from Episodes I - VI would be present in both articles. Quinlan Vos, for example, would have stuff from The Clone Wars and his Episode III namedrop in both of his articles, but everything from Dark Horse et al would be exclusive to his "Legends" article. We can ask VIPs on Twitter for clarification on stuff like TCW promotional material and sourcebooks, the films' visual guides, etc. Thoughts? Menkooroo (talk) 14:59, April 26, 2014 (UTC) Another interesting point I just thought of: Presumably The Clone Wars would have to be considered part of the Legends "canon" in the same way the OT and the PT are - not officially labeled as Legends but taken as part of the background for the Legends stories. So for example in Legends continuity Korriban is still also known as Moraband as well as Korriban, whereas in canon it is now only known as Moraband. --Multiversity (talk) 15:46, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * On the IRC people are talking about using tabs, each article will have a canon tab and a Legends tab. No idea how that will work for things that only exist in Legends material, or for things that only have *names* in Legends material. For example the many races, planets, technology etc. that are seen in the movies and Clone Wars but have only ever been named in the Expanded Universe. Strictly speaking that means they don't have names in canon yet. --Multiversity (talk) 15:12, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * That's a good question. Is M'iiyoom Onith still canonically the H'nemthe M'iyoom Onith? Or is she "Unidentified pointy-nosed cantina patron?" Also, a couple of anons were discussing this on Talk:Expanded_Universe. I was beaten to the punch with the two-article suggestion! Menkooroo (talk) 15:17, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd say using names from non-canon sources for canon concepts/characters/etc. until overriden by a canon one is fine. Especially that some of the names, while not appearing in the movies/shows were named behind the scenes while the movies were being worked on. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 15:25, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Articles with no canon name but named in Legends could simply have a message box at the top saying e.g. "this has no canon name yet, so the article uses a SW:Legends name" (and as we see with Rebels using the Lasat race, it's likely that more often than not the Legends name will be used if available) JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 15:25, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * That's probably the best option. I think examples like Korriban/Moraband where the names don't match will be few and far between. --Multiversity (talk) 15:29, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, for every Moraband, we have several examples like Twi'lek or Coruscant where the name originated in the EU and was subsequently used in the movies/TV show. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 15:42, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * What about characters like Darth Plagues? In the canon all we know is that he was a sith lord who mastered keeping people alive.  We don't know what race he was, when he was live or if he was even Palpantines master.   --DarthJon (talk) 15:26, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, that's exactly the sort of thing we're talking about. If a decision were adopted where the main article only included information from the main canon and nothing from the Expanded Universe, then the main article would probably return to something more like this. But all of that is up in the air at the moment. ProfessorTofty (talk) 15:33, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Given the new canon policy, pretty much the only available options are either this or keeping Legends information in the main articles until directly contradicted by the new canon (this way we'd throw away most of the post-ROTJ info from main articles, but keep most of the stuff from e.g the Old Republic era, which is not likely to be contradicted in the new movies). JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 15:36, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, what about The Clone Wars tie-in media - are novels, comics etc. based specifically on TCW part of Legends or part of the new canon? 16:05, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's something on which we should definitely seek clarification. Things like visual guides --- of both the films and TCW --- would give us species and character names for a lot of background characters, etc, etc. Jennifer Heddle has been really cool so far about answering questions which she's able to answer. If we keep up a good relationship with her, she could be a fantastic resource for how we're going to proceed. Menkooroo (talk) 15:59, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Given the new definitions of canon, there are pretty much two ways to go forward - either separate Legends information entirely from the newly defined canon, or treat Legends info like S-Canon info in the past - part of the main articles unless directly contradicted. Also, could the information possibly still be kept within the same articles, but with some javascript button that could be used to hide all Legends info and display only stuff that is marked as canon? JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 16:05, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Wellll, Legends info isn't S-canon --- it's non-canon. Heddle made that explicitly clear in some of her tweets. Menkooroo (talk) 16:14, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Example: in the Moraband article, you'd have "Moraband is the original homeworld of the Sith", with a button that would either hide or display the information marked as "legends". Would this be doable? This way we would still have one article on each topic (aside from maybe some post-ROTJ stuff) instead of having several. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 16:08, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * As for avoiding having multiple articles on one subject --- Green Tentacle is currently working on a mockup of a tabbed system. He's given me permission to link to it. But you can see it in the Recent Changes (or "Wiki activity," as I believe it's called in the default Oasis skin) too. Menkooroo (talk) 16:19, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Hold on, are we definitely sure everything is non canon? That isn't what I got from the official announcement, it only seems to confirm post-ROTJ stuff isn't main canon now. Anything pre-ROTJ might still be canon surely, I mean the latest TOR update was done with the Story group and so presumably is new canon not just legends, which by extent might mean all of TOR or at least some other parts could be. Did I miss another statement or announcement that definitely said all EU except the Clone Wars TV series and Star Wars Films are not canon? Ayrehead02 (talk) 16:11, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Apparently Jennifer Heddle is unsure about TOR at the moment. She has specifically mentioned pre-ROTJ stuff as being non-canon --- see Tope's collection of her tweets here (Tope, hope you don't mind me linking to that --- I saw it in the recent changes so I figured it was cool). "Q: What about the Kenobi novel, and other pre-Original Trilogy material? JH: Legends." Menkooroo (talk) 16:14, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * She specifically said that KOTOR is Legends now, for example. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 16:18, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Looks like she did say that the reference books for the movies and TV shows are still "there unless something new contradicts it" JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 16:21, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the pre-ROTJ stuff, she says that while it's now part of Legends, "We don't consider it "erased" it's still there. As long as nothing new directly contradicts it, it's there to be used". This means that while not officially part of the new canon, any stuff set before the movies can likely be thought of as something akin to the old S-Canon - it's not likely to be changed without good reason, and is likely to still be referenced in future media. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 16:23, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Could we actually ask Leland Chee? He's mentioned he's a fan of the Wook before so if we reach out to him in this time of chaos and ask kind of how we should proceed he might give us some ideas? Like are named film characters still named, e.g the various rogues gallery articles from SW:Insider. Should we mark everything not in the films as Legends? Etc. Ayrehead02 (talk) 16:30, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * I say we ignore Lucasfilm entirely. There's no reason to make drastic changes to our articles simply because of their business decisions, which essentially amount to a bratty new kid walking into a sandbox full of intricately designed castles, and knocking the whole thing down. Thankfully, Disney can't force their policy on this wiki in that way. Adamwankenobi (talk)
 * The wiki has always adhered to canon as defined by Lucasfilm. There have been drastic changes made to articles because of newly released content in the past too. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 17:28, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Those drastic changes resolved around solving issues like the retcon of a small quantity of material like the death of a character. This announcement however, comes to cause colossal changes if we go ahead with it since it defies our very existence. All the 110,000 articles here will be affected by it. Hell, even the naming of articles will have to be thought through as most naming was given in the now-considered non-canon. Winterz (talk) 17:32, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't that turn us into equally-bratty kids, though? We're considered such a credible source that Star Wars authors have actually cited us; if we do that, we'd go from reliable source to Denialist Fanwanker Central overnight. Rod (talk) 16:54, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * I absolutely agree with Adam. Friday's announcement was an affront to all the work many of you have done over the years. I was outraged. It was like I was instructed to take a match to thousands of dollars worth of books and probably just as many hours, just because they are a burden on Disney's marketing efforts. If we must acknowledge this new "canon" it should be reconciled with the 38 year continuity we know and love.  I utterly reject the Legends moniker.  It is degrading.  If anything I would prefer to see citations that say "OC" or Original Canon and "DC" for Disney Canon. TrueCanon (talk)
 * In the name of all things that ever were good if but slightly, don't make a new EU Wiki. That would be the death of Wookieepedia and the EU (wish I was exaggerating). Just come up with a tag that says "This article incorporates both canonical and 'Legendary' information" or something, and slap it onto everything on the site. Every time a contradiction explicitly occurs, move the offending info BtS. Nice, easy, simple, painless, elegant. --R5-X41238-G8-R3-3124-D2 (talk) 17:37, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * It will affect them all, but mostly just in the form of adding a legends tag, which can be done by a bot. The only articles that cause issue are understandably those that appear in both the new and old canon. In terms of Clone Wars, a lot of the characters new to it are pretty much exclusive to Clone Wars anyway and won't need huge amounts of change. That means really only the stuff from the films will need to have hugely drastic changes made which is probably only several hundred or maybe a bit over a thousand articles. To be honest a lot of stuff effected needed rewrites anyway like Luke and Han and stuff. While it will be a lot of work to change these I imagine that it can be done, with those uninterested in the new stuff just continuing to work on the Legends stuff unaffected. Ayrehead02 (talk) 17:43, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * I looked at those tabs Green Tentacle tested, and they look as a viable solution to be. It might work.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 17:48, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Make a new Wiki&mdash;"Wookieepedia Legends" or some such&mdash;and move all existing Wook content there. Keep the main Wook URL dedicated, as always, to the canon Star Wars universe. Start again from the ground up keeping in mind only what's now considered to be canon by Disney/Lucasfilm. Pain in the ass, but we all knew it was coming, so may as well bite the bullet now. &mdash; DigiFluid(Whine here) 17:49, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * No. 1358  (Talk)  17:53, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * That would strip Wookieepedia of everything that makes it so great. I fear that this is what we would end up looking like. Adamwankenobi (talk) 17:56, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah I don't see a whole new wiki as being the solution. The tabs seem viable as Dionne Jinn said so hopefully that system will work. Once we get a bit more information it will become clearer what the best solution is though I guess. Ayrehead02 (talk) 17:57, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * That April Fools' page is creepy. Like a vengeful #%$&ing ghost. Yeah, tabs would be another solution. Old Databank-style. Although that's for later on, I think. Tags (with a 'g') would be best until things become clearer with the first releases of the new canon. --R5-X41238-G8-R3-3124-D2 (talk) 18:07, April 26, 2014 (UTC)


 * Can I suggest that we keep "Legends" material as the default pageload for articles, requiring new-canon to be one click away? I'd like to see the millions of lines of text that are EU-exclusive remain as idiot-proof to access as possible. Why? Because, although Lucas Story Group folks are as knowledgeable on the EU as anyone here and generally have a great relationship with the Wook, other Lucasfilm employees have a history of skimming articles (see The Clone Wars) and incorporating select few things, then changing canon on the rest.

Basically, I'm saying: if future author/screenwriter/director of this/that is new to Star Wars, we might lose COPIOUS amounts of EU material simply because, those (few? Numerous?) times they browsed Wookieepedia rather than bugging Lucas Story Group 30 times a day, they were too lazy/confused/ignorant to click the "Legends" tab.

I know this seems strange and trivial, but please, this would statistically save quite a huge amount of EU information over the years. It's a little manipulative, but it's also just a default viewing mode we're talking about.  Winchester 327 Comlink » 18:58, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's fair to call the Story Group knowledgeable seeing as all they managed to do is find Select All > Delete. 1358  (Talk)  19:02, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Amen to that. We should be the ones consulted on EU knowledge. Winterz (talk) 19:07, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * I wish that were the case. Anyway just in terms of content the legends tab being the default makes more sense at least for now since most new canon pages will be tiny and uninformative. Greententacles test page is a pretty good example of this. Ayrehead02 (talk) 19:12, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Not that this is the place to discuss it, but we probably owe Story Group our thanks for the existence of the EU at all after Disney. Leland Chee and Pablo Hidalgo are certainly among the most knowledgeable fans in the world, and have done a lot for us over the years! Chee maintains all EU information possible in the Holocron, so there was no deletion. My guess is LSG was formed to help save the EU and make sure nothing like this ever happens again. Winchester 327 Comlink » 19:22, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Although there will almost certainly be some contradictions between, say, episode 2-13 of TCW and Episode VIII's novelization or something. 8) Luckily, this will come under the heading of "continuity error" rather than whole stories written off wholesale. Anyway, I agree with Winchester and Ayrehead above, and I like the tab idea better than forking the wiki. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 20:01, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

If the Legends tab thing is going to be the policy going forward, what will that mean for contradictions in what was previously EU content? As far as we know there doesn't seem to be any requirement that all Legends material be considered to be consistent with other Legends material. Previously we could count those contradictions as errors that needed to be written around to portray a consistent narrative, but now they could just be seen as inherent to the nature of the source material itself. Why should it matter if one "legend" contradicts another "legend"? There's also the question of whether previously non-canon material (like the old Marvel comics, or the LEGO games) are also Legends. If so the Legends label may be better thought of as a collection of disparate stories than a separate consistent timeline or universe.--Multiversity (talk) 20:34, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * The rule with canon before yesterday was generally "if it is contradicted by a more recent source or a higher-canon source, the latter takes precedent," right? So wouldn't the same still hold true for all Legends material, with April 25, 2014 acting as the cutoff date for updating the Legends canon? Existing contradictions would be permanent, rather than awaiting official word/revised timelines.  Winchester 327 Comlink » 20:59, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * But we're not living before yesterday, we're living now. New Legends material isn't going to be produced, but the concept of Legends itself is a part of the current canon policy. Personally I don't see that there's any reason to think that past canon policy applies to either Legends or new Canon material. Unless we consider the past canon policy itself to be Legends, which it may well be. --Multiversity (talk) 21:06, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Cutoff date might vary, actually, since there are still some ongoing Dark Horse comics to be included, and SWTOR might be part of both canons. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 21:07, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Another question about the tabs -- would it be possible to have users select in their preferences which tab comes up first? E.g., perhaps by doubling the number of skins, with users selecting either "Monaco-legends" or "Monaco-new canon"? &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 21:07, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * No, I don't think so. And Monaco hasn't been around since... 2011? 1358  (Talk)  21:09, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Monobook, then. 8) &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 21:13, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to be a bit off-topic, but what you were just talking about wasn't resolved: I think it's important that if we go with the Tabs approach, which, I think we should, we mustn't give viewers the impression that Ledgends is an official multiverse-starter, or canon, as it is not. We should put something in the ledgends tab or on the homepage to specify that Ledgends, no matter how much we want it to be, isn't Canon, and that the EU canon is now technically invalid. I do prefer the tabs approach, though, as it seems to make the most sense and be the most informational. Jennifer Heddle said that it's all retconned. It should certainly be available, but shouldn't be left where it is, because it isn't canon. Take that as badly as you will, but this site is NOT you, and this site must remain objective!Conner itsatrap (talk) 22:18, April 26, 2014 (UTC) I don't dislike that idea, but I prefer the Tabs because that way it wouldn't be mixed in with the canonical information. The Tabs would provide disambiguation, which I value quite highly.Conner itsatrap (talk) 22:47, April 26, 2014 (UTC) Sorry if this is a stupid question, I really haven't posted that much, but are tags the things that come up like "sorry about the mess," "I'm sorry, the article you're searching for does not exist," etc.?Conner itsatrap (talk) 23:20, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * * Legends, sorry I didn't sign.--Conner itsatrap (talk) 21:29, April 26, 2014 (UTC)conner_itsatrap
 * That was supposed to be a grammatical correction asterisk, I forgot how to make those. Sorry about the mess, I'm sort of new.--Conner itsatrap (talk) 21:31, April 26, 2014 (UTC)conner_itsatrap
 * What Winchester 327 said ought to be Wookieepedians' #1 priority going forward: KEEP EU MATERIAL VISIBLE AS %&#@!!! If it gets buried now, it will not be accessible when it's most needed. --R5-X41238-G8-R3-3124-D2 (talk) 22:09, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * As a fan site, we aren't obliged to follow Lucasfilm/Disney's every whim. Adamwankenobi (talk) 22:24, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * But we're not just any fansite, we're linked on the official starwars.com encyclopedia, and trusted by a million million fans! And even if we were just another fansite, we should still take things the way they are.Conner itsatrap (talk) 22:35, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * The fact that it isn't canon doesn't mean it shouldn't be accessible. Maximize its accessibility and stick a tag on top that says "This article incorporates information from 'Legends' sources", with a link to the canon or Expanded Universe article explaining the new Lucasfilm policy. --R5-X41238-G8-R3-3124-D2 (talk) 22:38, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Tabs would be optimal (Databank nostalgia is strong with this one). In the old starwars.com, I only ever read the EU tab because the film tabs were just a boring recap of the films. So it could actually help EU visibility if there was a barren wasteland of a page with canon information and a treasure trove of a page with EU information. The process would take forever, though. Tags would be useful for now. --R5-X41238-G8-R3-3124-D2 (talk) 22:54, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Like the ones here, directly below the disambiguation box. Right? --R5-X41238-G8-R3-3124-D2 (talk) 23:40, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

I'd vote for a holding pattern for now: leave it in unless it's explicitly out. Like, for instance, if Luke shows up with a new wife in the ST we cal slap a Legends tag on Mara, but until then leave her where she is. Keep in mind the official blog, which is knowledgeable in the ways of the retcon, is still running, so we may well get some, as TV Tropes puts it, "arc welding." Rod (talk) 01:28, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * I think there are a few people here who haven't accepted the truth yet. The EU is explicitly out. The starwars.com announcement, coupled with Jennifer Heddle's tweets, have explicitly confirmed that. There's no wiggle room. It's our job as a site to reflect this, not to pick and choose what we as fans think is still canon. Our "canon until proven otherwise" policy needs to do a complete one-eighty --- all previous EU is now non-canon until proven otherwise.

If we do end up using the tabs solution, I'll be a strong advocate for making official canon the default tab and Legends the secondary one. As has been pointed out above, we're one of the largest and most professional wikis out there, with a gigantic readership, links from starwars.com, constant references made to us by SW VIPs, etc, etc. We have a choice before us: To continue striving to be the #1 fan resource for documenting SW canon as dictated to us by Lucasfilm, or to turn into a group of bratty kids who don't like having their toys taken away. I really hope the choice is an obvious one to everybody. Menkooroo (talk) 02:23, April 27, 2014 (UTC) (Oops, haven't seen I was not logged in while writing the previous message) --Kaal (talk) 14:07, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * True, we ought to play our cards carefully, lest we go from respected corner of the fandom to whiner central overnight...Rod (talk) 02:52, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree that the tabs option is one of our better ones. I also agree that we should continue to try and retain the respect and repuation of the wiki. Unfortunately, the site will suffer regardless. A good 90% of the content will be non-canon, and the amount of new material being produced will not give us enough to build up such a complete array of information. But, we can't change Lucasfilm's policy (unless someone wanted to start a petition, which would be a slim chance... but still worth supporting) so all we can do is continue doing what the wiki has been doing from the beginning. Admiral James Kaizer (talk) 03:36, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * You're right --- our "canon" content will definitely be pretty paltry, but we can't change Lucasfilm's policy. When this is put to a vote in the Consensus track, one of the votes will probably be on which tab shows up as the default one: Canon or Legends. My vote will go with canon, for the reasons I espoused above. Menkooroo (talk) 03:46, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * If nothing else I think the names of minor characters like the Cantina aliens should be kept. Every piece of merchandising, even stuff that typically doesn't deal with the EU like the action figures, uses the card game, Tales from, etc. names for these characters, implying they are now considered the official names. Rod (talk) 03:52, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * This HAS been a blow to fandom on EU lovers like me. I was hoping to be back on but sadly I may never return. I suggest creating a dedicated EU wiki and to hell with this errant venture. So Kyle Katarn, Thrawn, etc are now branded non-canon and it just feels like a giant slap to the face on behalf of dedicated EU fans.-Boba fett 32 (talk) 04:39, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * I absolutely agree with Boba. Friday's announcement was deeply offensive to people like myself who have kept the Star Wars License lucrative in years when there were no films. As Far as Moriband is concerned, I will not accept it.  This was an INTENTIONAL slap in the face to EU lovers by Dave Filoni and his hat. I do not care about the supposed "respectability" of this wiki, if it means we are subservient to a company that holds us in such low regard.  They left no room for compromise. We are now just a pile of books with abstract ideas to be snapped up if it is useful to authors licensed by Disney. At a minimum the 38 year continuity be held and shared with the same level of respect as Disney's productions. Ours is not an alternative or subordinate of these new films. We must take a stand.  Jacen Solo should not be axed because he is given a new name in the new films.  Jacen has vastly more depth through literature than his clone will ever have in three movies.  True, I have not been building this wiki like so many here over the years, but I ask you "Do you have respect and love for all the labor you have devoted to this wiki to have it arbitrarily dismantled by a Committee in Cinderella's Castle?" TrueCanon (talk)
 * Moriband came from Lucas himself, I'm pretty sure; he thought it sounded cooler. Also, did you just create an account to make this post? Rod (talk) 01:22, April 29, 2014 (UTC)
 * That is lovely for George. He should have made that correction years ago when he allowed the license to be used by Dark Horse.  No Rod, I did not make a profile to just make one post, but I appreciate the insinuation.  My beloved Nute Gunray needs to be expounded on, I also want to completely review all the elements and metals of the Star Wars Galaxy and create articles for those that may have been overlooked. The same goes for all Trade Federation articles.  I did make the jump to enter the Senate because I feel the REAL decisions are being made here, by the fans.  Wookiepedia is a precious resource and the direction it takes is extremely important. I want to stand with those that do not want to roll over for this reboot.  I have spent a fortune in both time and gold on this continuity and I want to see it preserved as much as the democratic process will allow.  Perhaps I will be in the minority, but I will have taken a stand for what I truly believe in. Yes, I am new to this, but give me a little time.  Star Wars consumes much of my life and as I figure out how everything works, I intend to contribute to articles concerning the original canon and Disney canon that does not contradict the original canon.  Oh yes, and everything with full citation.  Nothing worse than finding out an fascinating fact about a character or item and having no clue from what source material it originated.  TrueCanon (talk)
 * My apologies, and I wish you luck on your future editing! You have to understand, though, that since Wookieepedia IS a precious resource, we've actually been cited by actual SW authors (which, incidentally, means we're a better resource for SW than Wikipedia is for real life, heh heh), and if we make the wrong move here we run the risk of losing all that. Rod (talk) 03:48, April 29, 2014 (UTC)
 * I know that Lucasfilm has not really presented it that way, but instead of seeing canon and non-canon, I personally now see official canon and Legends as two distinct timelines, without one of them being "erased" as so many fans are saying. I know it's just a personal point of view, but I think that this way of seeing it could satisfy everyone, instead of treating EU/Legends as some sort of Infinities stories. And one of the really good things I see in all this is that we could now consider that The Clone Wars TV show (and all its tie-ins) is no more tied to the rest of the EU (on the same level as the soon to be sequel trilogy), and so it could resolve the huge amount of contradictions that the show has made so far. Take Ryloth, for example: pre-TCW informations would still be completely valid, in its Legends form, but everything created about it in TCW would only be in its official canon tab. --109.212.145.74 14:06, April 27, 2014 (UTC)

Finally, someone else who sees things the way they are!Conner itsatrap (talk) 20:31, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Menkooroo, you make excellent points. I also think, unfortunately, that you're being slightly sensationalist in your above comments. I think Jennifer Heddle and LSG have made it clear that Legends, while not canon, are still highly relevant. I don't think you've considered (for instance) that they certainly expect Wookieepedia to favor Legends material and to be the #1 resource for it; defaulting to Legends—slight bias though it may be—would not only be what they expect, but it's extremely likely they're looking forward to the resource. The only other comment I find sensationalist is your claim that defaulting to Legends, at least with most articles for now, would somehow be unprofessional. That's way off-base. Documenting everything and sourcing it is not unprofessional. Favoring extremely relevant, official information (Legends) over official reboot information is not unprofessional, especially when you consider what Lucasfilm is actually looking to us for. Seriously, let that sink in.  Were the EU actually deleted—a misunderstanding that many of you are making—the default view wouldn't even be in question; we'd move on. It is not deleted. It is relevant, but simply not canon that they are required to adhere to. It's the exact equivalent of S-canon, as was stated above, and as can be understood from several of Heddle's statements. Now, I know S-canon only exists for Lucasfilm-internal classification now, but the role of Legends is clearly identical; that's all I'm saying.  Yes, she has used the term "not canon" several times. Try and see what she actually means by that, though, all of you: they simply aren't beholden to the canon in Legends. It's all about creative freedom. It's the same damn thing as it was with the prequels, and The Clone Wars; they can always do what they want, and there will be contradictions. But we never forked or tabbed the Wiki over "The Movies" and "The EU" before (and even the official site did), so don't start talking like that's unprofessional now, Menkooroo. "The EU exists as a resource." It's S-canon–equivalent, by all declared statements. The entire EU is the new Marvel. We never shied away from prioritizing uncontradicted S-canon along with everything else before. So what the hell are you thinking now, if you can forgive my frankness? Honestly, this is business as usual for Lucasfilm; all it really means is they want to expand the 3-year do-what-they-want window of The Clone Wars to the entire continuity.  Damn, now I feel like just about every fan is missing the point. Guess it'll take time. Anyway, ditching/de-prioritizing info (particularly of the sort exemplified in Greententacle's tabs test) is the wrong move.  Winchester 327 Comlink » 17:10, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Sir, you are in denial. While Jennifer said "we're not discarding it" that was clearly just a petty attempt to comfort the older fans. They're making it all non-canon, 30 years of work, how's that not discarding it? Its relevance to them is based on the ideas that they may use to please fans into leading them to profit by using ideas others created. All the EU has been thrown into a hole and they'll use it when and however they feel like. You can most certainly count on more than 90% never being used and the rest being used differently to suit their own purposes. Winterz (talk) 17:18, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Let's be civil. Thank you,  JangFett  (Talk) 17:19, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if I gave anyone offense and for strong language. We all are bound to have strong opinions on this.  Winchester 327 Comlink » 17:27, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Right, but my warning is for all involved parties. I realize that there are mixed emotional feelings, but let's not lash out against others.  JangFett  (Talk) 17:32, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Put simply as far as I can tell I think the difference between this new system and the old one is as follows: Previously, it was all canon unless the films or tv shows contradicted it. Now it's all non-canon unless the films or tv shows use it. It's an exclusionary principle rather than an inclusionary one. --86.164.55.135 20:08, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep, just exactly like it was for S-canon.  Winchester 327 Comlink » 20:46, April 27, 2014 (UTC)

I'd recommend doing it similarly to the old Starwars.com databank. You know, with the "From the Movies" section and then the "From the Expanded Universe" section (except we would call the "from the expanded universe" section the "from the Legends" section). As for names, I think we can keep them the way they are. After all, there is a reason for changing the story to better suit Lucas's vision, but what purpose would Lucasfilm/Disney have in renaming characters? There are only about 300 named characters (that's an overestimate) in the new canon, so we'd end up with "Unidentified Imperial Officer 237," and that's ridiculous. I don't think Disney will change names, so we're all good there. THEORY: Because they take place a long time ago in a galaxy far away (misquote), many legends have been created using historical characters and such. The new canon reflects the historical fact, but the "legends" reflect things that may or may not be true and although mostly contiguous, sometimes jibe with "fact." My theory is probably wrong, but there might be a bit of truth in it. 76.18.4.243 21:03, April 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * I'll revise my vote to holding pattern until A New Dawn hits in four months. I honestly think we can have little idea as to what this new continuity entails until the first work init actually shows up. Rod (talk) 21:11, April 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * Is it possible to ask the Lucasfilm Stroy Group their opinion? I expect that they've all used wookiepedia in the past, and are probably quite fond of it. They might even be reading this to try and get some idea of what the response to their announcement is! Personally, I like the tabs ideas. If the tab is empty for Canon, can we not automatically show the Legends tab? I imagine it wouldn't be too hard to do with Javascript. Even if required putting a bit of code in the empty tabs - that could be part of the creation script - and then manually removed when it was filled in. Sorry, I'm not going to sign this properly, I've forgotten my username. AdamBourke 22:42, April 27, 2014 (UTC)

I think some "new canon" content should also be added to the "legends" content in the event that there is no direct conflict. So, Rebels could potentially be there and the new Luceno Tarkin novel but not Episode VII. Having Luceno's Darth Plagueis and Tarkin exclusively under two seperate canon's wouldn't make a lot of sense to me seeing how Luceno's works all seem so interconnected with each other. For example, Tarkin content would appear in the "new canon" section and "legends" section while Darth Plagueis novel content would only appear in the "legends" section. The Darth Plagueis article for the new canon section would only contain what we know from Episode III. Unless the novel's canon status changes of course. Ceasing to add new content to this amazing knowledge database seems like a unnecessary concept to me. Thoughts? CornCorny (talk) 07:40, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * It's a necessary concept, unfortunately. Legends is finished --- no new stories are being told in its universe. They've made that pretty clear. All of the new stories are part of the new canon only. Since Luceno is, for all intents and purposes, writing within an entirely new universe now, it remains to be seen what kind of a story he'll tell. Menkooroo (talk) 08:07, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Film content and the TCW content will no doubt exist in both universes, why not new novels? If you ask Luceno if Darth Plagueis and Tarkin exist in the same universe I'm sure he'd most definetly say yes. So why seperate them? They've made it clear that legends content doesn't effect new canon but they haven't said that new canon content doesn't effect the legends content. We're focusing a lot on how the old won't effect the new, but I'm just trying to draw attention on the other way around. I don't think it always has to necessarily be a two way street, and no one from Lucasfilm has specifically said that it is one. Probably because they don't really want to draw attention to the continuity of the old stuff too much. But this is Wookieepedia. We do! CornCorny (talk) 13:54, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * I do understand your point. The question is, where do we draw the line? If information from the new novels apply to Legends, will it overwrite the non-canon info from the Legends timeline itself? If in the new films Luke never gets married and Han and Leia have only one child, Bob Solo, will that overwrite the Legends timeline post-RotJ? If we try to merge both canon with Legends, it will just be a mess. Its the reason that the old EU was shelved (sad sigh) to begin with. In my opinion, the Legends information in articles should at least refference The Clone Wars and the six films, as the timelines would fit together. Going forward, I don't think the new canon could fit into the old canon, unless they really didn't change much at all. Admiral James Kaizer (talk) 19:15, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * All new post return of the jedi content coming out will probably have to be emitted from the legends content. Mara Jade and Jaina Solo stuff would probably be a main appeal of the legends section to begin with. But new star wars content written to be including in the current universe (etc. Rebels and Luceno's Tarkin) could potentially fit in with relative ease. But there would have to be some clear policy guidelines in place. For example, what if there was to be a boba fett film which overrides some of the earlier books? I would say in that case the old books should stay because we have a new section dedicated to the new stuff. It could get messy yes. But I think its something to consider going forward. CornCorny (talk) 04:27, April 29, 2014 (UTC)

Another question: Are Legends and Canon mutually exclusive? Would there be any situation where you will find Canon information in Legends (or vice-versa)?-- Richterbelmont10  ( come in R2! ) 03:50, April 29, 2014 (UTC)
 * All existing canon material (the six films and the six seasons of The Clone Wars) are also part of Legends continuity. Any Legends continuity that made it into The Clone Wars is canon, but only as much of it as appeared in TCW. For example, Nal Hutta is canonically the Hutt homeworld, but only what we know from its appearance in "Hunt for Ziro" is canon. Everything else about it from Legends is simply Legends. Similarly, Quinlan Vos is canonically a dreadlocked dude who can read images from objects, but all that stuff from Dark Horse is just Legends material. Does that make sense? Menkooroo (talk) 03:58, April 29, 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree that what lucasfilm have stated to be true canon is pretty much all that we should include in the new canon section. But I think there is room for the new to have an effect on the old section. For example, the Rebels show and Luceno's Tarkin novel have (as far as I'm aware) written to work within the already constructed universe. Why not include it within the old content if it fits in fine? CornCorny (talk) 04:31, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Menkooroo, so what you're saying is that Canon and Legends are not mutually exclusive. All that is Canon is also Legends. Is this correct?-- Richterbelmont10  ( come in R2! ) 15:02, April 29, 2014 (UTC)
 * No. As I'm understanding it, only the CURRENTLY existing Canon (that is, the six movies, TCW movie + series) is also part of Legends. However, SWR and the new episodes won't be part of Legends. 1358  (Talk)  15:04, April 29, 2014 (UTC)

Tabs or no tabs?
If we're putting it to a vote, mine's on tabs. It would be difficult, and potentially take forever, but I think the final product will be worth it.Conner itsatrap (talk) 03:40, April 27, 2014 (UTC) I'm not very knowledgable about bots. Would a droid really be able to differentiate EU from TCW? On a sidenote, we would have to wait until they say whether the Radio Dramas, Novelizations, and TCW-based EU is still canon.Conner itsatrap (talk) 04:18, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Cade Calrayn has cooked up a revised version of what the potential "tabs" system could look like. Check it out here (the links aren't part of it; this is just what the tabs themselves could look like). What do you all think? What does everyone think is the most feasible idea at the moment? Tabs? Two separate articles for every movie character/battle/whatever? Hopefully no one really wants to split into two wikis altogether. Feel free to keep throwing out any and all ideas. Menkooroo (talk) 03:17, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * With the use of bots, it wouldn't even have to take all that long to implement. Menkooroo (talk) 03:46, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I meant that bots would be able to handle page moves. But yeah, all of the "canon" articles we'd have to recreate ourselves. And you're right; we won't know if they're complete until we get some more word on novelizations et al. But we can start with the movies, TCW, and Rebels anyway, and then add more info as we receive more word. Call R2-D2 an "astromech droid" for now, and maybe be able to change it to "R2-series astromech droid" if someone tells us that the visual guides are canon. Menkooroo (talk) 04:51, April 27, 2014 (UTC)

And there's also the problem of what the default would be for visitors.Conner itsatrap (talk) 13:20, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * If we go with tabs, what do we do about those articles that only have "legends" content? Tag them with something at the top of the page saying "this only appears in legends material"?--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 07:18, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you're right, that's essential. Especially since the new canon will have tie-in novels, and likely comics and sourcebooks and the whole nine yards. If someone looks at Gilad Pellaeon or Ania Solo or Denjax Teppler, there should be a very visible notice informing them that it's 100% "Legends" material. More visible than a small square in the top-right corner. Menkooroo (talk) 15:21, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * I like what R5 suggested above: use tabs, make the Legends tab the default tab because it will always be more informative and keep the "canon" tab to an absolute minimum: no EU-given name or species, no EU illustrations, no sources whatsoever (because they are all Legends now) - strictly movies and TCW info. Let the users see something like this and have them decide which version of the page they want to read. --Darth Nospher (talk) 07:53, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * We don't know yet how informative the new stuff is going to be, it might surprise us (or it might not). And I think we have to keep the canon tab as default, because, well, it is canon and the whole point of this wiki is to deliver canon information.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 08:01, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Would it be possible from a technical point of view for users to choose themselves which tab they wanted to display first by default? Have a message on the frontpage notifying new users on how to do it, so that after they go to an article and see the bare-bones "canon" version, they can make the appropriate change and start browsing articles without having to make extra clicks to get real information. QuiGonJinn  Senate seal.svg(Talk) 09:35, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think that's possible, sadly. It would have to be done with browser cookies or similar; something I don't believe is very doable with MediaWiki. 1358  (Talk)  10:51, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * We can probably do something along these lines with JS, if we went with tab view for example. I.e. we'd have a gadget or something similar that would let you set a preference for Legends or new canon, and on page load the JS could select the right tab which would display the preferred version of the article. Cheers,  grunny &#64; wookieepedia :&#126;$ 11:43, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * I had a play with that yesterday, but it has its own limitations. It makes it harder to edit the page since you're looking at a transcluded copy rather than the real thing. We'd also have to run all the JS to set up era icons, italicise titles, add language links, etc every time you changed tab. I'd lean towards keeping it simple if possible, even if that prevents us having user preferences. Green Tentacle (Talk) 11:53, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * I do not believe that Wookieepedia would lose its respectability if, going with the tabs option, we made the EU tab the default view (I have always thought that striving to appear respectful is the most pathetically sad of endeavors anyway). I believe it's silly to make people go through a bare page called something like "Unidentified hooked-nosed human (Ord Mantell)" before they can reach the page with all the information, sourcing, pictures, etc, just so we don't look like we're not dancing to Lucasfilm's tune. But that's not what's most important, because people will look for the EU pages anyway. What is most important is that no EU article is deprived of its canon information. The mixed paragraphs that contain intertwined EU-film information should not be broken up (there's a hassle for you) so that the "Legends" tab remain purely EU. The canon tab ought to be ultra-conservative according to the "only what was seen on the screen is canon" dictum (it'll be basically empty pages of "This unidentified individual was there when...") and the Legends tab should be our normal articles. A year from now, when a bunch of new material has brought in new info and a bunch of EU sources have been canonized, the canon tabs would probably start to look like something. What is also, of course, important, is that we do not differentiate between canon levels and such in what is showcased on the main page. --R5-X41238-G8-R3-3124-D2 (talk) 13:29, April 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * At the moment, it wouldn't even make much sense to show the new canon content as default, because there is so little content, mostly just what's explicitly shown and mentioned in the movies and TCW. Everything else, every little detail such as names, species, etc. not explicitly mentioned is non-canon until proven otherwise. Sure, it's likely that Vader's flagship will still be called Executor and that those fuzzy creatures on Endor are still called Ewoks. But we can't just assume that until we get official confirmation. So keep the Legends content as default until there's enough canon content the satisfy the reader's interest. This is still a wiki made by fans for the fans, not a paid project where everyone works for LFL and has to strictly adhere to their business plans.--91.67.137.207 13:57, April 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * I mean, right now, we can't name nearly everything that appears in the movies - Y-wings, B-wings, Star Destroyers, several planets, droid models, minor characters... Articles which used to e huge will be five paragraphs long now.

I see where you're coming from, and I think it's fine either way. I just hope nobody is misled by the main page.Conner itsatrap (talk) 14:06, April 27, 2014 (UTC)

I don't think we need to go so far as discarding names and species just because they weren't explicitly mentioned in the films. So, the little furry guy who helped Leia can still be Wicket the Ewok and the big furry guy in the Cantina can still be Muftak the Talz, etc. I doubt they'd change anything like that just for the sake of changing it. Rod (talk) 14:30, April 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, tell that to morriband(sp?). They didn't have any reason to change that, but they did because they could. They still might do the same thing to anything! We shouldn't make any assumptions at all, I can't stress that enough.Conner itsatrap (talk) 15:08, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Moraband was just one exception. For instance, several characters in TCW were of a species that was only named in what is now Legends. Those names were always retained, which I think sets a valuable precedent for us to work off of. Rod (talk) 20:42, April 27, 2014 (UTC)

But Legends isn't s-canon, when they say it's still a resource, they mean they can bring anything back, not that they wouldn't have to. They know what it means when they say "not canon." We should have the Tab for EU, but I think the non-subjective, technically correct version should be default.Conner itsatrap (talk) 18:04, April 27, 2014 (UTC) Agreed. Everyone else, if you wanna see where we're taking this or get involved, it's in my talk.Conner itsatrap (talk) 22:15, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Treat Legends like S-canon, have it as default pageview, under a tab labeled "Legends." Have the films, TCW, Rebels and everything canon moving forward under a secondary tab labeled "The Saga." Inverse prioritization of the old Databank. Speaking of which, if we go with tabs, why not move Behind the Scenes to one as well?  Winchester 327 Comlink » 17:49, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * I didn't say it was S-canon. If you'd like to better understand how the Legends system will function, please thoroughly read my comment near the end of the topic above, as well as (re)reading Heddle's tweets.  Winchester 327 Comlink » 19:04, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * I think you're the one who doesn't understand: it's all been retconned. You may not have come to terms with that, as many haven't, which is normal, but it's the truth. You're misinterpreting it all.Conner itsatrap (talk) 19:15, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Nope. Let's move this disagreement elsewhere if we're both going to keep acting like we know everything.  Winchester 327 Comlink » 20:59, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Of course character names from the EU will survive. Just about 100% of them, I bet. A stupendous amount of EU stuff will be canonized if you ask me. But the official line is very clear: "Apocryphal until proven canonical." Which means that most movie-related articles might just have to lose their names. Clarification about Visual Guides and novelizations would be helpful, of course, but if "the six films are the only thing that's canon" is all we keep hearing, that's what we should put on the "canon" tab. --R5-X41238-G8-R3-3124-D2 (talk) 01:45, April 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * Considering that the entire Star Wars universe has essentially been turned upside down, I think that the best and only way to handle the situation right now is to use tabs to differentiate from "canon" and "legends" sources. Are there better solutions to the problem? Perhaps. But currently there are none better, and just getting rid of all of the EU information like some people are suggesting would be a huge waste. As for the debate as to whether we should put the "canon" first or the "legends" first in the tabs, I think having canon first would be more appropriate. Everyone who wanted to read about the EU could still do so, but since the Disney stuff is now "canon" it should probably be put first. JediMaster22 (talk) 03:30, April 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * I for one foresaw this happening anyways. Not gonna rant like before but I've put my foot down and refuse to go on with the whole universe except on the EU itself. And so my favorite Legacy comics have been null along with MANY stuff from my kidhood like Dark Forces and Shadows of the Empire. I'm in a terrible nostalgic mood for this and I will not accept Rebels and even the new films as official canon. I propose we move to a dedicated Expanded Universe wiki and drop this heaping hellhole.-Boba fett 32 (talk) 13:21, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

I think the tabs system is the only logical way forward, the addition of another page for each subject (character, planet ect.) will make searching and reading content clunky at the best. The creation of another Wiki would be devastating. My proposal is that all non-real world pages have the tabs added to them, be that with or with out a bot. The current content on the page would be added to the "Legends" tab and an active effort would have to be made by the community to create "canon" articles for all necessary pages. Cameronfr (talk) 16:34, April 28, 2014 (UTC) I agree completely.Conner itsatrap (talk) 17:35, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

Hypothetical question: If we were to separate all articles into tabs ("Canon" and "Legends") today, how many articles would have tabs?-- Richterbelmont10  ( come in R2! ) 19:58, April 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * At a very rough estimate 98,000 (the number of articles which use the real-world era icon subtracted from the total on the wiki of 110,000) Cameronfr (talk) 20:18, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * This sounds like WAY too much. There are tons of subjects that haven't appeared in "New Canon" and will therefore not be needing tabs, from what I can see. 1358  (Talk)  20:29, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Personally, I think that all non-real world articles should be tabbed, because they may become canonical or it should be noted that they are not canonical for clarity's sake. Cameronfr (talk) 20:42, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * There will be some kind of a template or some such thing to signal those articles that have only Legends material on them, but they do not necessarily need tabs to do that.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 20:45, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Could we use a banner similar to on Memory Bank Alpha. This would not be a replacement of the tabs, and would be present in articles with and without tabs (as highlighted in Dionne Jinn's post directly above) Cameronfr (talk) 21:48, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

Legends
I was surprised to see that there is no page for the "Legends" label that all EU material is going to be assigned for continued publication. Given the magnitude of yesterday's news, which created the label, I figured such a page would already exist. Is there a reason why it doesn't? I was going to create one, but I don't want to run afoul of any wiki policy. &mdash; Eric Geller 17:50, April 26, 2014 (UTC) Yeah, I feel like there's a clear difference between the EU as it existed and this new Legends thing. --Multiversity (talk) 11:08, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * We're kind of in panic/damage control/chaos mode right now, but we are probably going to have one very soon. 1358  (Talk)  17:53, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Given that Legends is basically the entire EU, I imagine are Expanded Universe page will be renamed or redirected. The page will need some serious additions, but as there is still discussion as of how Wookieepedia is going to handle this entire thing I imagine it'll be a little while before they're made. Any Legends page created will be merged into that most likely so I wouldn't bother. Ayrehead02 (talk) 17:54, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * It says in the press release "While the universe that readers knew is changing, it is not being discarded." It isn't clear on whether the "Legends" thing is going to be for only post-ROTJ EU or everything. Adamwankenobi (talk) 17:59, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Check out some of Jennifer Heddle's tweets here. It's not just the post-ROTJ EU. The dream is over, guys. Menkooroo (talk) 02:27, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Matt Martin wasn't very optimistic either.  Stake black   msg 14:37, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * The Expanded Universe page has been updated with the "Legends" info. "Legends" could get its own page, one that explains it's a publishing label for the EU superseding all other publishing labels, but the "EU" page should not be renamed/redirected. --R5-X41238-G8-R3-3124-D2 (talk) 18:15, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * "to be clear, there is no "new EU." There is only the established EU--hereafter known as Star Wars Legends, and the main, canon storyline, which includes the films, The Clone Wars and Rebels television shows, and the new novels beginning this September with A NEW DAWN. It sounds like a minor thing to point out, but it's significant in the fact that even the term "EU" always meant it was outside the main, whereas now, all new material will be part of a unified whole." The Star Wars Books facebook pages just clarified this in a comment, the previous EU and Legends are one and the same. Ayrehead02 (talk) 14:06, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

Two Wikis?
This is a bold suggestion, and indeed one I'm not entirely sold on myself, but I thought it deserved throwing out. We now have what I'll call two distinct "eras" of Star Wars canon, for the sake of argument they will heretofore be referred to as "Lucas-era" (1977-2014) and "Disney-era" (2014- ). My personal interpretation here, which you're free to disagree with, is that the continuity changes are such that Disney-era Star Wars effectively constitutes the creation of a totally-new work of fiction, with Lucas-era Star Wars being now a finished work of fiction. So, given that every work of fiction ever seems to have a Wiki, is it really all that unreasonable that Disney-era Star Wars could have one, as well? For brevity's sake and in keeping with the theme of large furry things, I will call this hypothetical Wiki "Talzpedia."

So, suppose we were to launch Talzpedia, a new Wiki for a new work of fiction. We'd have to maintain it well, to make it every bit the reliable source Wookieepedia is. If the same crop of editors ran it, I'm not sure it'd give the impression of whining or exiling all the canon we don't like. We'd simply have two Star Wars Wikis - Wookieepedia, for the Lucas-era canon, a work of fiction we now know to be finite, and Talzpedia, a Wiki for an ongoing work of fiction. Two Wikis, valid unto themselves, for two works of fiction, valid unto themselves.

As I said, I'm not sold on this idea, and as a matter of fact I'm liking it less and less as I sit here and type, but I still think it's an option that needs presenting, so it might as well be me what presents it. Rod (talk) 04:10, April 28, 2014 (UTC) I am also very against this idea, but if we go with it, I prefer Wampapedia, just because I think it should be something in "New Canon."Conner itsatrap (talk) 17:31, April 28, 2014 (UTC) Hmm... I had read about this idea already and hadn't given much thought to it, but now that it's been logically explained in a non-rant format, I have to say I'm not entirely against the idea. I mean, I for one would likely end up only using this new wiki. Would it damage Wookieepedia? Maybe. I don't know. I just thought I would put my two cents into the matter. JediMaster22 (talk) 20:35, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * I believe the idea of splitting the wiki has been suggested during this conversation already. And the answer to that has been no. You see, Wookieepedia has a reputation of being a good source. Having competition is not really a good way to go.--Dionne Jinn (Something to say?) 04:54, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming if there was a lot of editor overlap it wouldn't really be competition, but I guess that's a fair point. Like I said I don't necessarily support this option, just wanted to draw attention to the fact it exists. Rod (talk) 05:02, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * And even if we did (which we aren't) we'd think of a better name than Talzpedia. Wampapedia, maybe?  IFYLOFD  ( Enter the Floydome ) 04:59, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no. That's what I think. Disney will not move forward on the assumption that the "Lucas era" is over. It will move forward on the assumption that nothing changed, except it has the power to pick and choose from the EU. --R5-X41238-G8-R3-3124-D2 (talk) 12:05, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * The Talz do appear, and are named as such, in TCW, so... But I also like Wampapedia better. Rod (talk) 17:41, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * If we see Wookieepedia as a Wiki for a finished work of fiction, and if the same members staffed "Wampapedia" and it was treated as a sister site to the Wook, I don't think it would be that damaging. The only real difference I could see is that it would be theoretically possible for the Wook to be complete someday. Rod (talk) 22:21, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

Vote on new canon policy

 * Everyone who's taken part in this discussion so far may be interested in the current vote on a new canon policy. Before voting, make sure that you meet the requirements for voting in the Consensus Track. You need to have edited actual site content (not forum pages like this one --- real articles) at least fifty times. And please heed the request made in the CT: "This proposal operates on the basic assumption that Wookieepedia is going to divide its articles, in some form, into "Canon" and "Legends." That is a forthcoming discussion, and I ask that everyone please refrain from going off on that discussion tangent here. Please reserve that discussion for that appropriate forum." That appropriate forum would be this very Senate Hall thread. Menkooroo (talk) 02:39, April 28, 2014 (UTC)