Tolkien Gateway

Forum:Canonicity

(Difference between revisions)
(term to cover all level 2?)
Line 30: Line 30:
  
 
::I think this is the best solution, though I'd like to see some option for "outdated"; "doubtful" and "contradicted" doesn't always cover it. -- {{User:Ederchil/sig}} 09:18, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 
::I think this is the best solution, though I'd like to see some option for "outdated"; "doubtful" and "contradicted" doesn't always cover it. -- {{User:Ederchil/sig}} 09:18, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 +
 +
:::Just going by word sense, ‘outdated’ might cover or be covered by ‘deprecated’. But I think in a sensible distinction of levels as Narsil Palùrfalas’ describes ‘outdated’ fits better in level 2. However, not all level 2 stuff will fall under that title, there is also e.g. stuff in Sil that turns out not to be tenable because of things later revealed or discussed in HoMe. I’m reluctant to create two canonicity levels out of this, there doesn’t seem to be enough difference in degree here and I think 5 levels (+ 0=adaptations) is quite enough. Maybe one of the terms ‘displaced’, ‘sidelined’, ‘out-of-focus’, ‘non-coherent’, ‘discordant’ or ‘discountable’ might cover everything likely to fall in level 2. — [[User:Mithrennaith|Mithrennaith]] 02:25, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:25, 16 September 2010

Tolkien Gateway > Council > Canonicity


I know that this issue has been debated and discussed before (mainly here and here), but it seems that it never really came to a conclusion - or at least what was decided wasn't wholly enforced. At the moment we have a few different ways by which we highlight articles to show that they're not canon: some are simple 'This is not considered canon', on other pages it's the canon scale. I personally liked the Canon scale discussion and the idea to put a scale on each article. I'd like to see a better set of images to use for the canon scale, and with the

Error: must specify an image in the first line