Some people call this "Canon conflict", but as the term "Canon" itself is problematic (see below) in the Lexicanum such occurrences should rather be called Conflicting sources. What to do in case of conflicting Accepted sourcesĭue to the reasons given above and below this paragraph it is clear why sometimes one Accepted source might partially or completely contradict another. Such cases have to be submitted and discussed here.
#WARHAMMER 40K MISSION EDITOR LICENSE#
by authors, artists or other individuals working for Games Workshop, its subsidiaries or license holders private homepages, blogs, forum posts, Patreons etc.(with the possible exception of individuals posting in an official capacity, see "grey areas" below)Įxamples of grey areas requiring evaluation on a case by case basis or specific disclaimers forums, blogs, message boards, mailing lists etc.other Lexicanum articles (yes, you read that right, only first-hand material can be used as an accepted source).Any resolved status question will be subsequently included in the list above (if it is not already there). If an Editor is not sure if he/she is allowed to use a specific source, please submit your request here, thank you. Games and background material published by Black Industries and Fantasy Flight Games (under license).Collectable Card games licensed by Games Workshop.Games Workshop licensed computer games based in the Warhammer 40,000 universe (for example via screenshots).Games Workshop, subsidiaries and license holders websites.Black Library Novels, short stories, audiobooks.5 Why the term "Canon" or "Canonicity" is problematic.4 What to do in case of conflicting Accepted sources.3 Examples of grey areas requiring evaluation on a case by case basis or specific disclaimers.Obviously the following lists are non-exhaustive and there might sometimes be grey areas that can and should be discussed with Administrators and/or Bureaucrats with a view on their status. The only requirement being that any Editor must be able to prove the existence and content of any cited source he/she uses.
Therefore as a rule of thumb all material ever published in whatever form by Games Workshop, its subsidiaries and license holders is considered an acceptable source. The Lexicanum explicitly limits itself to documenting (sometimes with appropriate explanations on the context of certain problems) the available lore.
Simply because - and let us be quite clear about this - it is not the mission of the Lexicanum (or any other encylopaedia) to make sense of and try to align conflicting data. For the general problem of the concept of "canon" see further on where this is discussed.įor practical purposes this discussion is of minor relevance (although it is interesting to keep its main points in mind). This does however not mean that the old information is considered "wrong" and non-acceptable and has to be deleted altogether - this is definitely not the case! It is an explicit goal of the Lexicanum to also reflect potentially outdated information - with appropriate disclaimers and explanations (see here). More recent sources do however take precedence over older sources. no accepted source is considered more valid than another official source. We are aware that even accepted sources might contradict each other, but within the Lexicanum there is no "hierarchy of sources" - i.e. Only accepted sources can be used in the compulsory citation process as a legitimate source. These sources are sometimes also referred to as official, legitimate or canon sources but the term that should be used with reference to any work within the Lexicanum is nevertheless accepted sources (see also further down). The term "accepted sources" as used in the Lexicanum describes the body of source material that an Editor is permitted to use when creating or editing articles in the Lexicanum wiki.
0 kommentar(er)
