Question about methodology?

[Psyborg]

After looking everywhere on this site? What are the debate rules of this site?

What do you use to determine which of two ore more contradictory "facts" to use from equal level sources? I understand the higherachy thing, where GL is over his employees who are over contractors and finaly outside sources, but what if two equaly possitioned sources have dramaticaly different facts to use? How do you decide which has precedent?

[Surlethe]

After looking everywhere on this site? What are the debate rules of this site?

The Rules. You might want to check the forum at the top of the main page that says "Newbies please read before posting".

What do you use to determine which of two ore more contradictory "facts" to use from equal level sources? I understand the higherachy thing, where GL is over his employees who are over contractors and finaly outside sources, but what if two equaly possitioned sources have dramaticaly different facts to use? How do you decide which has precedent?

And here is the generally accepted canon statement, on the main page of the main site. If there are two seemingly contradictory observations, we rationalize away the contradiction, or we ignore the unprecedented one. Since this has been discussed for nearly a decade online, I'm pretty sure only a few very minor contradictions still exist unrationalized, shivering in the dark corners of SWvST fandom.

[Psyborg]

The rules you linked to govern the format for posts as far as I can tell.

My question pertained to the rules and logic used to "rationalise" the differances found. For instance, if two otherwise equaly canon sources, say two books from the EU, have equaly exact but different "facts", what criteria and rules are used to determine which is correct?

I know that if the two "facts" were from different levels of the canon, quasi-canon and EU, then the most highly placed source would over rule the lower placed source. But what do you do and how if the two items are from equal level sources?

[Solauren]

Take the one closest to the movies or books like the Visual Dictionaries.

Otherwise, it would be best to go with the later published one over the older one.

I.e anything in the Hand of Thrawn Doulogy trumps the Heir to the Empire trilogy cause the book was published later.

[Psyborg]

Take the one closest to the movies or books like the Visual Dictionaries.

Otherwise, it would be best to go with the later published one over the older one.

I.e anything in the Hand of Thrawn Doulogy trumps the Heir to the Empire trilogy cause the book was published later.

Would not the movies over ride all the other books and the Visual Dictonaries? Would the TV special and Ewok Adventures also beat the various books? What if the movies are sient on this item? By the statement above, later published novels would then trump the previous mentioned Visual Dictionaries? Would the number of sales to consumers have any realivance to the status? IE, would a book that did not sell out weigh one that did?

Could somebody post a list of all the works by date of publication?

[Batman]

Take the one closest to the movies or books like the Visual Dictionaries.
Otherwise, it would be best to go with the later published one over the older one.
I.e anything in the Hand of Thrawn Doulogy trumps the Heir to the Empire trilogy cause the book was published later.
Would not the movies over ride all the other books and the Visual Dictonaries?

Urm-yes?

Would the TV special and Ewok Adventures also beat the various books?

I doubt the Ewok movies are part of official SW canonity but if they ARE then yes they would.

What if the movies are sient on this item? By the statement above, later published novels would then trump the previous mentioned Visual Dictionaries?

Um-no, as the time-of-publishing argument if at all only applies within the same level on canon?

Would the number of sales to consumers have any realivance to the status? IE, would a book that did not sell out weigh one that did?

No?

[Noble Ire]

Would not the movies over ride all the other books and the Visual Dictonaries?

Yes, they do.

Would the TV special and Ewok Adventures also beat the various books?

The only source they could possibly override would be Splinter in the Mind's Eye, since it was one of the very few novel publications of the period (and its already been reteconned so much the matter is a moot point), but theoretically, yes.

By the statement above, later published novels would then trump the previous mentioned Visual Dictionaries?

Direct movie-relation books, like the ICS, are, I believe higher canon than novels, thus later books couldn't override them.

Would the number of sales to consumers have any realivance to the status? IE, would a book that did not sell out weigh one that did?

Sales have no impact on canon policy.

[Jedi Guardian]

Has anyone noticed since i've come along nobody reads the main site and just post? Oh don't worry, I learned. For those of you that knew me when I was newer, you should know what I mean.

[Surlethe]

Has anyone noticed since i've come along nobody reads the main site and just post?

We generally get three kinds of newbs around here: the kind who know what they're talking about, come in prepared, and only screw up every once in a while; the kind who come in unprepared, screwed up big time, got their act together, and improved; and the kind who come in unprepared, screw up badly, don't learn, and get their asses booted out.

Oh don't worry, I learned. For those of you that knew me when I was newer, you should know what I mean.

You're still new.

[Kurgan]

Just to play devil's advocate here, but haven't people willingly admitted lately that Wong's site (as much as we all love it) is somewhat out of of date? We all know the guy doesn't have time to really revise it but nobody sees that as a weakness because they assume you come here to these forums, read everything and update it accordingly in your mind.

So while the site might be a good starting point, it doesn't seem to be the end-all, be-all of all star wars knowledge like the forums are viewed as being.

Now as far as the Vs. debate is concerned, we all pretty much have agreed that Trek isn't going to win, and that doesn't change, but the various deals with canon and which sources trump whatever is constantly evolving, so "read the site" wouldn't give you the full picture of that anyway, unless Wong was obsessively updating all the time. Even Saxton is a little behind in his updates, yet new EU sources are coming out all the time with new info.

Some would point to the Wookieepedia, but of course we all know anybody can edit that, and the various editing/revert wars that have been going on with McEwok and others.

Where do we get the notion that guide books are automatically more reliable than novels, out of curiosity? I mean it seems logical enough to assume, but besides that, has Tasty Chee said anything about this? Because if newer is always better, then the newest novels or games would outrank even Saxton's writings.

[Ghost Rider]

Just to play devil's advocate here, but haven't people willingly admitted lately that Wong's site (as much as we all love it) is somewhat out of of date? We all know the guy doesn't have time to really revise it but nobody sees that as a weakness because they assume you come here to these forums, read everything and update it accordingly in your mind.

So while the site might be a good starting point, it doesn't seem to be the end-all, be-all of all star wars knowledge like the forums are viewed as being.

Now as far as the Vs. debate is concerned, we all pretty much have agreed that Trek isn't going to win, and that doesn't change, but the various deals with canon and which sources trump whatever is constantly evolving, so "read the site" wouldn't give you the full picture of that anyway, unless Wong was obsessively updating all the time. Even Saxton is a little behind in his updates, yet new EU sources are coming out all the time with new info.

Some would point to the Wookieepedia, but of course we all know anybody can edit that, and the various editing/revert wars that have been going on with McEwok and others.

Where do we get the notion that guide books are automatically more reliable than novels, out of curiosity? I mean it seems logical enough to assume, but besides that, has Tasty Chee said anything about this? Because if newer is always better, then the newest novels or games would outrank even Saxton's writings.

No, it doesn't unless said writing overwrite the canon.

Or did you forget the whole reason Dr Saxton was able to be approved was the very fact his source of anything is the absolute highest source there is. One has to show that his source is somehow contradicted by movie material. Not because some dumbshit TFN nooblet says otherwise.

[Psyborg]

Working from the published list at this site, as linked?

To see if I get this right?
1. 3 Special Edition Movies, Last three Episode Movies, 6 Movie Novelisations, the 6 Movie Screen Plays, the ? Radio Plays! (Number unknown?)

2. The "Expanded Universe" of everything else?

As far as I can tell there is no statement from GL or any of his employees that differentiates any of the EU matirial from any other EU matirial? It is all "Quasi-canon"? The visual dictonaries are not singled out in any statement that I can find.

What about the various games, both electronic and role playing? The newest "Star Wars Core Rule Book" has the various GL's "Official" seals and Trade Marks. Does it count as valid EU matirial too?

[Noble Ire]

1. 3 Special Edition Movies, Last three Episode Movies, 6 Movie Novelisations, the 6 Movie Screen Plays, the ? Radio Plays! (Number unknown?)

2. The "Expanded Universe" of everything else?

That seems about right, yes.

As far as I can tell there is no statement from GL or any of his employees that differentiates any of the EU matirial from any other EU matirial? It is all "Quasi-canon"? The visual dictonaries are not singled out in any statement that I can find.

There is often some dispute on this (ie, books taking precedence over games/comics), but as far as I can tell, all EU is about equal on the canonicty scale, excluding sources that are directly contradicted by more current material (or G canon), or game mechanics, which are invalid.

What about the various games, both electronic and role playing? The newest "Star Wars Core Rule Book" has the various GL's "Official" seals and Trade Marks. Does it count as valid EU matirial too?

Story, character, background, etc. material in those sources are generally canon, but game mechanics are not. Thus, officially, the events of say Jedi Outcast did occur, but Kyle Katarn probably can't withstand direct hits from missile launchers, as he can in game play. The same goes for RPGs.

[NecronLord]

Kyle Katarn probably can't withstand direct hits from missile launchers, as he can in game play. The same goes for RPGs.

He may be capable of energy absorbtion/reflection like Vader though, for the blaster bolts.

[Noble Ire]

Kyle Katarn probably can't withstand direct hits from missile launchers, as he can in game play. The same goes for RPGs.

He may be capable of energy absorbtion/reflection like Vader though, for the blaster bolts.

True. Of course, there are the points in the game where you can get virtually bisected by Reborn lightsabers and not take permanent damage.

[NRS Guardian]

Here: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 14&start=0 is the discussion of SW canon that is stickied in the Pure SW forum, this discussion helped clarify the position of the movie guides, and introduced N-canon for material that isn't canon which includes most of Splinter of the Mind's Eye and the Infinities comics.

[Psyborg]

After looking at the link to the SW only thread, I find the argument compelling that the movies, Etc, come first and everything esle comes second. But, if something in any book shows up in a movie then that item becomes "G" canon?

What happens when the various "C" canon works contradict each other? Do the number of incertions take precident, like Chee appiers to state?

What happens when other parts of the "C" canon that do not show up in the movies? They are still "C" canon, but if contradicted by "G" canon are obviously then wrong!

[Noble Ire]

After looking at the link to the SW only thread, I find the argument compelling that the movies, Etc, come first and everything esle comes second. But, if something in any book shows up in a movie then that item becomes "G" canon?

Only that particular element. If that wasn't the case, every book that even mentioned Coruscant would be absolute canon, which they are not.

What happens when the various "C" canon works contradict each other? Do the number of incertions take precident, like Chee appiers to state?

More current sources always take precendence. If two contemperaries contradict each other, then I think one would probably go with the source that has the most backing from other works, yes.

What happens when other parts of the "C" canon that do not show up in the movies? They are still "C" canon, but if contradicted by "G" canon are obviously then wrong!

Um...yes?

[apocolypse]

After looking at the link to the SW only thread, I find the argument compelling that the movies, Etc, come first and everything esle comes second. But, if something in any book shows up in a movie then that item becomes "G" canon?

Like Noble Ire stated, it's pertains to those elements being discussed. Many things in the EU will not show in the movies however, as they deal with the timeframes before, in between, and after the movies. There are some exceptions to this though, case in point being the DK books that are tied into the movies.

What happens when the various "C" canon works contradict each other? Do the number of incertions take precident, like Chee appiers to state?

Essentially yes. As far as I've always understood it, let's say you do have a case for some contradiction in between EU sources. If it is not possible to rationalize or hamonize the sources, than we would tend to favor the side having more corroborating sources. The age of the sources also plays a factor into it as well.

What happens when other parts of the "C" canon that do not show up in the movies? They are still "C" canon, but if contradicted by "G" canon are obviously then wrong!

Indeed. An example of this is in the NEGVV (New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels). IIRC it was listed in there that the Empire used A-wings. The movies obviously do not corroborate this, and this particular piece of information is incorrect. (Likely was an error that escaped notice until publishing)

[Batman]

Indeed. An example of this is in the NEGVV (New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels). IIRC it was listed in there that the Empire used A-wings. The movies obviously do not corroborate this, and this particular piece of information is incorrect. (Likely was an error that escaped notice until publishing)

May I ask why? Unless I'm very much mistaken the movies need to contradict lower level canon information for it to be discarded, not simply fail to support it. Unless the NEGVV explicitely states the Empire used A-wings in the battles we see it's entirely possible they do so elsewhere.

[Noble Ire]

Indeed. An example of this is in the NEGVV (New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels). IIRC it was listed in there that the Empire used A-wings. The movies obviously do not corroborate this, and this particular piece of information is incorrect. (Likely was an error that escaped notice until publishing)

May I ask why? Unless I'm very much mistaken the movies need to contradict lower level canon information for it to be discarded, not simply fail to support it. Unless the NEGVV explicitely states the Empire used A-wings in the battles we see it's entirely possible they do so elsewhere.

Very true. After all, the X-Wing was originally an Imperial design too.

[Simplicius]

Out-of-universe:

I don't have the NEGVV on-hand, so I might be talking out of my ass, but there is that A-9 Vigilance fighter I remember from the old V&V Guide which was explicitly an Imperial craft. What's the likelihood that the two were transposed?

[apocolypse]

May I ask why? Unless I'm very much mistaken the movies need to contradict lower level canon information for it to be discarded, not simply fail to support it. Unless the NEGVV explicitely states the Empire used A-wings in the battles we see it's entirely possible they do so elsewhere.

I may have mis-spoke earlier. They have a section for affilation, and for the A-wing it was listed as the Empire instead of Rebellion. However though, what you said it true. G-level canon, even though they don't corroborate this, don't explicitly contradict it either.

[Simplicius]

Very true. After all, the X-Wing was originally an Imperial design too.

However, unlike the X-Wing which was designed by an independent company, the A-Wing was designed by Rebels to suit their own needs (from the Databank). It was originally manufactured "in various locations, with many fighters having slightly different characteristics" (from the Wiki entry) - indicative of a production line designed at least in part for secrecy and reduced vulnerability to attack - and was only "later" mass-produced by Koensayr.

Each starfighter was hand assembled, resulting in a slow production rate and a number of interesting modifications.

The combination of quality control lacking hand assembly, use of second-hand components and the number of complex systems packed into the starfighter’s small frame made A-wings notorious for their high maintenance to flight ratio—the second worst in the Alliance fleet in 3 ABY.

As a result, the Alliance was able to field few full squadrons of A-wings; by 4 ABY, the fleet was able to summon only one full unit for the Battle of Endor.

This suggests that any mass production by Koensayr did not occur until after the Battle of Endor, and thus beyond the time-scope of movie-level canon.

Now, considering that during the period of the films, the A-Wing was brand-new and in limited-run production, it would be difficult for the Empire to procure examples would it not? Capturing a production line, already difficult due to their scattered state, would only secure a few examples because the lines were not capable of mass-production. Capturing damaged examples from battle and restoring them to operational status would also yield small results, because the Alliance itself wasn't fielding many A-Wings at the time.

I submit that, within the scope of the films, the number of A-Wings the Empire could lay hands on would be too small to form operational units, and any captured examples would most likely be used for purposes of evaluation and dissimilar combat training.

However though, what you said it true. G-level canon, even though they don't corroborate this, don't explicitly contradict it either.

Not only are the movies silent here, but there is also a conflict within the lower-level canon - the statement in the NEGVV vs. the apparently generally established history of the A-Wing. How would such a conflict best be resolved?

[Batman]

Not only are the movies silent here, but there is also a conflict within the lower-level canon - the statement in the NEGVV vs. the apparently generally established history of the A-Wing. How would such a conflict best be resolved?

As neither the Databank nor Wiki have any canonicity whatsoever unless there's canon (higher canon for preference) sources contradicting it the NEGVV stands. Unfortunately the Wiki entry doesn't state what part of the information comes from where so I can't say where the contradiction arises, assuming it actually exists.