Only based on movies and The Clone Wars?[]
The claim "The Encyclopedia entries only contain information available from the six Star Wars films and The Clone Wars series, and do not incorporate any Expanded Universe material" was added to this article in this edit by an anonymous user from February 2012, but what is the basis for it? If you look for example at the entry for "Sith" archived here, it says "Thousands of years ago, a rogue Jedi had come to the understanding that the true power of the Force lay not through contemplation and passivity. Only by tapping its dark side could its true potential be gained. The Jedi Council at the time balked at this new direction. The dark Jedi was outcast, but he eventually gained followers to his new order." But since this wasn't stated in the movies, was this ever stated on The Clone Wars show? If so, what episode? And if not, that suggests that this claim about the Encyclopedia being exclusively based on movies + The Clone Wars is simply a misconception on the part of the wookieepedia editor who added this line back in 2012. Hypnosifl (talk) 19:47, February 13, 2016 (UTC)
- The information about the origin of the Sith was added to go along with Darth Bane's appearance in The Clone Wars. Lots of Darth Bane backstory was also added to go along with it, and that backstory was very much a departure from his EU storyline. So a more accurate thing to say would be "The Encyclopedia entries only contain information pertaining to the six Star Wars film and the Clone Wars series, and do not incorporate any Expanded Universe material." - Brandon Rhea(talk) 20:02, February 13, 2016 (UTC)
- But was that information about the pre-Bane origins of the Sith mentioned in The Clone Wars episode featuring Bane, or are you saying it was added to the online Encyclopedia by someone at Lucasfilm to give some extra background that was consistent with, but not stated directly on, what was shown in The Clone Wars? If the latter, have their been any statements indicating that statements in the Encyclopedia that didn't originate in the movies or The Clone Wars show should be taken as part of the new Disney canon, as the canon section of the Sith article seems to do? Hypnosifl (talk) 20:44, February 13, 2016 (UTC)
- It was added by Lucasfilm to go along with the episode and Bane's appearance in it, just like how Databank entries often provide more information about Rebels characters, events, etc. than the shows do. The information was added to the Encyclopedia a little over a month before the official announcement that the EU was no longer canon, but Lucasfilm knew that the EU wasn't going to be canon anymore long before then, so EU information wouldn't have been added to the Encyclopedia. The Encyclopedia was also active and maintained for several months after the Legends announcement, until the entirety of StarWars.com was revamped and the Encyclopedia became the Databank. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 20:49, February 13, 2016 (UTC)
- When you say "the information was added to the Encyclopedia a little over a month before the official announcement", what specific information do you mean? If you're talking about the information on the origin of the Sith, I linked above to an archived version of the Sith entry on the Encyclopedia from 25 September 2011 which had the statement about the Sith being founded by a "rogue Jedi". So this was long before the April 2014 announcement that the EU was no longer canon, and just over a year before the official announcement of Disney acquiring LucasFilm which happened on 30 October 2012. According to the "Disney Deal" section of the wikipedia article on Lucasfilm, talks between Disney and Lucasfilm began in May 2011 so the info in that Sith entry was from after that, but is there any evidence that by September 2011 they already had definite plans about what the new canon would look like? If not, and if there have been no subsequent announcements of Encyclopedia content being part of the new Disney canon, then it seems questionable to assume it is just because the info was at the time added to give background on The Clone Wars. Hypnosifl (talk) 21:17, February 13, 2016 (UTC)
- I was referencing the Darth Bane information specifically (re: 'a little over a month before'), since some Sith history was added as a result of that (and the stuff about the rogue Jedi was never removed when the new Darth Bane info was added). That being said, we can be logical about this. The Encyclopedia was never about EU information. That was a departure from the old Databank, which did regularly include EU information. When the Encyclopedia was created, that was all removed. So rather than the information from this one entry being evidence that the Encyclopedia can't be considered canon, it's more logical to say that it can be considered canon. That goes along with the fact that the Encyclopedia continued to be an active post April 25, 2014 source, it was never labeled non-canon, and, as previously mentioned, that older information about the Sith was not removed when the information about Darth Bane and Sith history surrounding him was added. So we've decided that, absent Lucasfilm suddenly saying that the information in there isn't canon, it's safe to add to canon pages. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 21:24, February 13, 2016 (UTC)
- Fair enough--it's not the policy I would have chosen since it does depend on speculations about the intent of the people behind the site, but I'd agree the speculations are at least plausible ones. Thanks for explaining the reasoning. Hypnosifl (talk) 21:48, February 13, 2016 (UTC)
- By the way, I recently noticed that the background info on the history of the Sith in the "Sith" and "Darth Bane" Encyclopedia entries actually seems to come directly from the novelization of the Star Wars Phantom Menace (which predates the Encyclopedia entries of course), see pp. 137-138 on google books which says "The Sith had come into being almost two thousand years ago. They were a cult given over to the dark side of the force, embracing fully the concept that power denied was power wasted. A rogue Jedi Knight had founded the Sith, a singular dissident in an order of harmonious followers, a rebel who understood from the beginning that the real power of the Force lay not in the light, but in the dark. Failing to gain approval for his beliefs from the Council, he had broken with the order, departing with his knowledge and skills, swearing in secret that he could bring down those who had dismissed him. He was alone at first, but others from the Jedi order who believed as he did and who had followed him in his study of the dark side soon came over. Others were recruited, and soon the ranks of the Sith swelled to more than fifty in number. Disdaining the concepts of cooperation and consensus, relying on the belief that acquisition of power in any form lends strength and yields control, the Sith began to build their cult in opposition to the Jedi."
- So, are there actually any examples of bits of information on the Encyclopedia that were wholly original to it, not found in any previous film/show or any book? If not that would weaken the case for considering it an independent source for canon information. Hypnosifl (talk) 07:44, March 22, 2016 (UTC)
- I was referencing the Darth Bane information specifically (re: 'a little over a month before'), since some Sith history was added as a result of that (and the stuff about the rogue Jedi was never removed when the new Darth Bane info was added). That being said, we can be logical about this. The Encyclopedia was never about EU information. That was a departure from the old Databank, which did regularly include EU information. When the Encyclopedia was created, that was all removed. So rather than the information from this one entry being evidence that the Encyclopedia can't be considered canon, it's more logical to say that it can be considered canon. That goes along with the fact that the Encyclopedia continued to be an active post April 25, 2014 source, it was never labeled non-canon, and, as previously mentioned, that older information about the Sith was not removed when the information about Darth Bane and Sith history surrounding him was added. So we've decided that, absent Lucasfilm suddenly saying that the information in there isn't canon, it's safe to add to canon pages. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 21:24, February 13, 2016 (UTC)
- When you say "the information was added to the Encyclopedia a little over a month before the official announcement", what specific information do you mean? If you're talking about the information on the origin of the Sith, I linked above to an archived version of the Sith entry on the Encyclopedia from 25 September 2011 which had the statement about the Sith being founded by a "rogue Jedi". So this was long before the April 2014 announcement that the EU was no longer canon, and just over a year before the official announcement of Disney acquiring LucasFilm which happened on 30 October 2012. According to the "Disney Deal" section of the wikipedia article on Lucasfilm, talks between Disney and Lucasfilm began in May 2011 so the info in that Sith entry was from after that, but is there any evidence that by September 2011 they already had definite plans about what the new canon would look like? If not, and if there have been no subsequent announcements of Encyclopedia content being part of the new Disney canon, then it seems questionable to assume it is just because the info was at the time added to give background on The Clone Wars. Hypnosifl (talk) 21:17, February 13, 2016 (UTC)
- It was added by Lucasfilm to go along with the episode and Bane's appearance in it, just like how Databank entries often provide more information about Rebels characters, events, etc. than the shows do. The information was added to the Encyclopedia a little over a month before the official announcement that the EU was no longer canon, but Lucasfilm knew that the EU wasn't going to be canon anymore long before then, so EU information wouldn't have been added to the Encyclopedia. The Encyclopedia was also active and maintained for several months after the Legends announcement, until the entirety of StarWars.com was revamped and the Encyclopedia became the Databank. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 20:49, February 13, 2016 (UTC)
- But was that information about the pre-Bane origins of the Sith mentioned in The Clone Wars episode featuring Bane, or are you saying it was added to the online Encyclopedia by someone at Lucasfilm to give some extra background that was consistent with, but not stated directly on, what was shown in The Clone Wars? If the latter, have their been any statements indicating that statements in the Encyclopedia that didn't originate in the movies or The Clone Wars show should be taken as part of the new Disney canon, as the canon section of the Sith article seems to do? Hypnosifl (talk) 20:44, February 13, 2016 (UTC)