Canon vs Non CanonEdit

I believe this article, or the book path of destruction should be marked as non-canon considering there are sever conflictions even in the first couple pages of the article where they state things like Banes remorse, and him standing against Kaans Thought Bomb, and Qordis being his master, whereas in the book if you were to give Bane a true master I would say Ka'sim, and likewise he gave Kaan the thought bomb N.Y.N.E.^Comlink30px 08:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Both article and book are canon. Chances are, the differences can be reconciled by judicious use of "a certain point of view," but even if not the differences will be retconned into coherence if at all possible. jSarek 09:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  • But perhaps a box or section heading should be put up regarding this, so mention of the ambiguous canonicity is not only in behind the scenes. Admiral Carth Onasi 15:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

ContradictionsEdit

If anyone's wondering why I reverted it, its because it seems to have been written by someone with an axe to grind against the story and/or Anderson, since the edit contained POV statements such as "glaring" and implying since Bane of the Sith seems to portray things inconsistent with other stories, it is automatically incorrect. This is nonsense, since this short story was published prior to both Jedi vs. Sith and Path of Destruction, it can't have contradicted any statement on Bane's character, since this story was the only appearance of the Sith Lord. QuentinGeorge 03:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

• Irregardless, it stands in contradiction to Jedi vs. Sith and the Darth Bane novel and not in ways that are reconcilable, but in important character elements. No one's blaming Anderson (it's certainly not his fault), but the Bane of Karpysyn's book would not have felt remorse, nor would he have feigned it. Unfortunately, this story simply no longer fits in with what came later based on how Karpyshyn chose to develop Bane's character (following the model provided by Macan.) Karpyshyn's follow-up novel will likely put the final nail in the coffin unless he goes out of his way to find a way to retcon the story.—Unsigned comment by 72.68.138.55 (talk • contribs).
  • Well, Mr Anon, I'm afraid you are mistaken. All contradictions are handled on a case-by-case basis. Merely the fact that a later novel contradicts elements of this story does not automatically grant said novel precedence. I have once again reverted your POV statement. Please do not re-add them. I suggest in the mean time, you familiarise yourself with Star Wars canon policy. QuentinGeorge 04:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)