Forum:CT Archive/New canon policy

Now that Star Wars has a "new canon," Wookieepedia needs to update its Canon policy. Just in case anyone has missed any of the news since Friday, April 25, the following now applies to canon: These facts and the statements made in the following proposal come from these two StarWars.com news articles and from comments made by Lucasfilm senior editor Jennifer Heddle on Twitter. You can peruse all the things she said here.
 * The Expanded Universe is non-canon and is now under the new "Legends" banner
 * The official canon is now the six Star Wars films, Star Wars: The Clone Wars, Star Wars Rebels, and just about everything new that comes out from this point forward (with a few exceptions)
 * The new canon officially begins on screen with Star Wars Rebels and in print with the aptly named novel A New Dawn, which will be released on September 2, 2014

I have rewritten our Canon policy page, which was in desperate need anyway, to reflect these changes. I invite everyone to read the draft here. I will preface this by saying that I have made no major changes overall, besides the introduction of the "new canon" and rewriting everything. 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. Everyone, I'm sure, also understands that we're facing a lot of changes to how we do things in the weeks and months ahead. I know we're all upset about the EU, but I ask that everyone please approach this objectively and without emotionalism.

Perhaps more so than any of our other policy pages, this Canon policy is a living document. It can, and certainly will need to be, updated and revised as we move forward. Heddle herself has said that the canon status of everything isn't crystal clear right now, and there are certain things they haven't even figured out yet (this is all explained in the proposal). As they make decisions and announce updates, we can update this policy as needed.

I will now summarize the changes in the proposal:
 * The page is now divided into two sections: New canon and Expanded Universe. Each section describes how its respective canon system works and provides a solid overall frame of reference for what sources are now new canon and what sources apply to the EU.
 * The New canon section devotes a subsection specifically to the comments made by Heddle in regards to the canonicity of certain EU sources. For example, there is EU material that is still ongoing, and she admits they haven't fully determined everything yet. Once they do, this section can be updated.
 * The EU section begins by laying out the Holocron continuity database's former tiered canon hierarchy system, which you can also read about in our Canon article. This system is now defunct in lieu of the Lucasfilm Story Group.
 * The section after that details how the old canon system still applies to our Legends articles. In short, we're not changing how we write our Expanded Universe articles. The idea that higher canon trumps conflicting lower canon in the EU still applies. I've laid out a more simplified explanation of the tiered canon hierarchy, since it has the potential to be confusing. Again, this isn't changing anything, but is only simplifying the explanation to help our editors understand the relationship between what I've termed Cinematic canon and Expanded canon.
 * The only significant departure here is that we're basically shedding the "ambiguous canon" tag. Now that all of the EU is non-canon, calling something in the EU "ambiguous canon" is pointless. So we will simply document that material as normal without any declarations of ambiguity.

That's about it. There's quite a bit here to digest, so I'm happy to answer any questions and clarify anything that needs it. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 02:13, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 02:13, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) Cade  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg  Calrayn  02:17, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 3)  IFYLOFD  ( Enter the Floydome ) 02:17, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) Absolutely. This is what we need best as our new policy considering what we know as of now. Also, it's a good basis for the other incoming proposals and changes regarding this recent crisis. Winterz (talk) 02:19, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 5) SFH 02:53, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 6) I absolutely hate this situation, but we need to have something in place. Supreme Emperor (talk) 02:54, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 7) Looks good to me.-- Exiled Jedi  Oldrepublic crest.svg (Greetings)  02:59, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 8) Feels more like a dusk than a dawn. :/ MasterFred Commerce Guild.svg(Whatever) 03:03, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 9) Trip391 (talk) 03:07, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 *  CC7567  (talk) 03:26, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 1)  JangFett  (Talk) 03:31, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) JorrelWiki-shrinkable.pngFraajic 04:11, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 3) Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 04:22, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) With some nitpicks, to be covered in Discussion. jSarek (talk) 04:31, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

Comments

 * In the "Reliable resources" section: The following identifies reliable, officially-licensed sources of information for Expanded Universe material. ... All Marvel Comics and Dark Horse Comics published prior to the Lucasfilm declaration of April 25, 2014, with specific exceptions as noted by Lucasfilm, such as the Star Wars: Rebel Heist and Star Wars: Legacy Volume II series. This is confusing --- it reads as if Rebel Heist and Legacy Volume II are exceptions noted by Lucasfilm and are not official Legends material. Maybe you meant to note those two series in regards to material published after April 25? Menkooroo (talk) 02:33, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I meant that to say those are examples of things published after April 25 but are still Legends. I've made an attempt at clarifying. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 02:41, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm personally in favor of a holding pattern until "A New Dawn" is released. We simply don't have much to go on at the moment without any works under this new policy. Rod (talk) 03:02, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * That's why this is a living document. We can make changes as they are announced. It does us no good to sit on our hands for six months. And we actually have plenty to go on, according to what Jennifer Heddle has said. We know basically what the new canon is and what it's not. That's a very solid starting point for us. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 03:05, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * We have the statement, true, but not how it's going to work in practice, which is why I think we should be cautious. Rod (talk) 03:07, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * "That's not how it's going to work in practice." You have nothing to base that on. Meanwhile, this policy reflects statements issued by Lucasfilm's senior editor. Our current Canon policy page is simply unusable right now. It needs to be updated. And I'm proposing we update it according to what we know at this point. Again, we can make changes as we learn more. This is a good thing. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 03:11, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree it's now most likely unusable. Which is why I'm in favor of using it until the first work in the new continuity appears, seeing what that work contains, then putting the new policy into action accordingly. Rod (talk) 03:42, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Like I said, sitting on our hands for six months isn't going to do us any good. Everyone is eager to figure out how we're going to begin dividing articles between Canon and Legends, and that's a decision we're better off making sooner rather than later. And this policy is the first step so we know what an Expanded Universe article is now that its content is non-canon. We're still going to be writing EU articles in the interim, and our New Canon articles are only going to increase and expand as more Rebels info comes out and the first books hit in July, so we need to have this all defined in a clear-cut policy now. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 03:50, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Very, very fair point. I'll concede; it's definitely best to plan ahead rather than just have all the stuff dropped on top of us at once. Rod (talk) 04:12, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Not to mention that there will be plenty of promotional material and other medias that will need to be recorded here long before the novels or Rebels come out. Winterz (talk) 03:14, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * I feel like EU-established names, establishing the same character in multiple scenes (Nova Stihl as Navy trooper in conference room and leading stormies chasing Han on Death Star for example) and fates of characters seen in a doomed movie location (example Imperial dignitaries all being established by Star Wars: Galactic Files Series 2 as all being killed in Death Star II's destruction) should be incorporated into the "canon." Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 04:24, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * For the latter example I think of the old Databank entries for characters like Cassio Tagge, Conan Antonio Motti and Tiaan Jerjerrod, all established in their Movies sections to have been killed during their respective Death Stars' destruction, though none of those three's fates were obvious in the films alone. Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 04:28, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Those are the sort of things that we only solved with resort to the EU and they've made that clear that it's not canon any longer so we can't assume that information unless it is canon. Remember Darth Maul? Everything in the EU pointed out to him being dead and then Lucas/Filoni felt like claiming he had never died and since EU being what the undervalue that it was, had to re-structure everything. Let's not do the same mistake, specially now that the sources are not even considered canon. Winterz (talk) 04:32, April 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Would the old Movies sections to the original Databank entries be considered canon sources though? Hanzo Hasashi (talk) 04:34, April 28, 2014 (UTC)