Forums > Senate Hall > SH:Canon planets in Legends material
(FYI, FFG means Fantasy Flight Games.)

Given the mention of Omereth and Espirion in Star Wars: The Old Republic: Knights of the Eternal Throne, should we expand upon the discussion that occurred in Forum:SH:Essential Atlas placements still valid until proven otherwise? --Nostalgia of Iran (talk) 15:44, March 25, 2017 (UTC)

Back when Lothal was first included in the FFG books, it was decided not to create a Legends page for it, but that was before the Legends/Canon switch, when Legends was still the default, and it would be silly to have the Legends version of Lothal as the main article (see: Talk:Nexus of Power). Since then, some FFG books have had their appearances lists separated into rather questionable "Legends characters/planets/etc." even though there isn't really much of a separation between the two within the books (and the canon list includes characters like Kanan or Ezra but not ones like Darth Vader, who should by that logic appear in both). The fact that we consider the appearances of Kanan or Lothal in these books as canon (as well as some elements introduced by FFG, like Lodaka), but the appearances of elements previously seen only in Legends (as well as some elements introduced by FFG, like Weik) as Legends is pretty arbitrary. I'd say that it would make more sense to treat sources like Nexus of Power or Endless Vigil as Legends only (not saying that all FFG products should be considered only Legends, e.g. Star Wars: The Force Awakens Beginner Game obviously isn't). Which means creating Legends articles for such subjects as Lothal or Kanan (whose existence in Legends does not contradict any previous Legends continuity). JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 02:58, March 30, 2017 (UTC)

  • Treating FFG as all legends seems like a bad plan in the long run as they are certainly going to gradually include more and more elements from the new canon as more content is released. While there hasn't been any major contradictions to legends yet from what I've seen there almost certainly will be at some point in the not to distant future. If elements from Rogue One or more recent episodes of Rebels make it into the books for example they could quickly start contradicting things like the Battle of Toprawa or Thrawn's backstory. To be honest I feel that it makes more sense for FFG to be treated as all canon then all legends, although treating it as neither might actually be the best solution. This is completely separate from canon elements appearing in the Old Republic, as that game has been definitely confirmed to be ongoing legends content and so anything in it should certainly get a legends article. Ayrehead02 (talk) 11:31, March 30, 2017 (UTC)
    • I'm mostly OK with the previous decision to consider FFG stuff based on Legends sources to be Legends material and stuff based on canon sources to be Canon. But what is needed is a clearer decision on what to do with content *created* for FFG books. Lodaka is considered canon probably because she has a connection to Lothal, and I guess it makes sense for some new characters or concepts connected strongly to the preexisting Legends material to stay as Legends, but I think it would make sense to consider concepts/characters/places that originate from the new FFG books that do not rely on previous Legends continuity, like the planet Weik, to be considered Canon. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 23:05, March 30, 2017 (UTC)
      • E.g. I think it's best for Nareen Cale to remain a Legends article due to the mention of the New Sith Wars, as that name was not confirmed in any canon source. But I can't see why, if e.g. Lodaka is canon, articles such as Holenesh, Orl Miscord should be Legends. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 23:25, March 30, 2017 (UTC)
        • Wookieepedia deals in documentable facts, not speculation. If certain material falls into a canonical grey area that the Story Group has deemed neither canon nor Legends, then we cannot make such a ruling ourselves; that would be speculation on our part. Asithol (talk) 23:13, April 20, 2017 (UTC)
          • Regarding Canon material that is used in FFG products: according Toprawa and Ralltiir, as long as it does not contradict the canon material, then the Lothal info (or any other material introduced as Canon) in the FFG sourcebooks is considered canon. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 23:40, April 20, 2017 (UTC)
            • @Asithol didn't Pablo Hidalgo literally say "I'll leave that up to the Wook to decide" about the ambiguous stuff in FFG a while ago? If it doesn't contradict any canon nor rely on major Legends stuff not reintroduced in canon yet, I don't see why we shouldn't treat it as canon. JagoAndLitefoot (talk) 22:08, April 21, 2017 (UTC)

Hope no one minds my inserting that note at the beginning of this discussion; i didn't know what FFG was when i started reading and it made it hard for me to know whether anything being said made sense. Now, skimming the conversation again... reminds me of the old G-canon, C-canon, S-canon etc system. FFG sounds S-canon-ish. S, as in Schrodinger? ;-) (Check out en dot wikipedia dot org/Schrodinger's_cat if you don't get the reference.) 23:44, May 14, 2017 (UTC)

  • @JMAS: For FFG material about a topic (such as Lothal) that really only exists in one or the other continuity, it's a reasonable deduction that that material applies to that continuity. For more ambiguous cases, it is not our place to make such a ruling. One of Wookieepedia's longstanding core principles is that we report only verifiable information from licensed sources. If the license holders have not made a ruling about what continuity certain information fits into, and the choice is at all ambiguous, we also cannot make such a ruling. This is a consequence of this bedrock principle.
@JagoAndLitefoot: Pablo Hidalgo is not a Wookieepedian, so it's not surprising he would be unaware of the rules under which we operate (assuming his comment was even meant seriously and not facetiously). The Wook does not "decide" things. It reports only. This has been longstanding Wookieepedia consensus. We cannot label something canon or Legends unless the Story Group has made it clear which continuity is intended. (To their credit, they've done so with almost all licensed material published over the past 40 years. It's a big job, and we can't insist they do it in a way that satisfies us as chroniclers. They may have good reason for wanting to keep gaming material in a grey area.)
@ Thanks for adding that note up top. Those of us who use these acronyms constantly can easily forget that they're unfamiliar to the general reader. Asithol (talk) 18:09, May 23, 2017 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.