More Clone Wars Story Reels - Bad Batch Arc

[2046]

Pardon the primitive quoting, but:

"Outside of Hidalgo, the only thing making this canon would be ... nothing."

Just logic.

"If Lucas didn't chose to finish the show before selling his property, it means he didn't consider it worth finishing."

Ah, I see. I don't think you are aware of the history. As far as Lucas seems to have been aware, TCW was going to truck on. His statements at the time were that he wanted Star Wars and his company to be someplace safe and protected.

Then the Disney layoffs and Lucas-named company shutdowns began. And TCW got the axe because they couldn't just move it to a Disney network by contract. And Disney is mixing in the EU, making a new screwed-up universe. Oops.

In short, it went to crap all around. And so we get Rebels, where Season 2 appears to want to pretend to be TCW Season 23 or so, but ain't, because this is a new universe. But, we get 7, 8, & 9, reboot-style, so whatever.

"Anything pertaining to the fictional work but not officially released is best considered rough production material, notes. If Lucas had released a piece of script he wrote on the back of a paper enveloppe, but which didn't find its way into a final product, it wouldn't be canonical in the slightest. It would just remain as material left on the cut floor, so to speak."

I have already given a superior analogy in regards to a shot, scored, and edited ENT Season 5 being released, not to mention TCW's "Lost Missions" Season 6 being released, like these are, in streaming form. Your notes comparison is less analogous and a bit circular.

Indeed, on notes, we agree. TCW scripts that weren't nearly complete a la the story reels are either fodder for Filoni or else being converted to other formats. I don't accept those as original-universe canon.

Finally, I wonder if perhaps you are rolling with an old-fashioned view of web material. A few years ago web material was some strange concept for TV network people … low-budget dithered .avi crap at best, enemy territory at worst. But with modern webisodes, completely-streamed series, and even streaming networks that only later expand from the web to broadcast (e.g. Glenn Beck's network The Blaze), the old lines are blurring.

"As for the Ewok movies, they are official products and their story is clearly happening within the SW universe, but for some reason, it seems that they were some kind of EU."

Lucas discounted them. No one has discounted TCW … quite the opposite, in fact.

I take issue with your ICS comparison to Mike, but hope in the above are the clues to determine why.

[Lucky]

That's a logic quite broken, sharing a similarity with the ICS being canonical because it's based on production material (that never was canon since, well, it's only production material).
As far as we know, no one who reads those reels will ever know about the new elements before they're properly introduced in the released fictional material. So those references might as well not exist.

Disney also gave itself the liberty to exploit the old EU at length. Although they declared it as external to their canon, the logic you use would mean that said EU is both part of the canon and outside of it, just because Disney uses elements from the old EU for its new material, therefore making the entirety of the EU part of the canon.

The only thing that I am aware of that Clone Force 99/Bad Batch has appeared in are the story reels, and the Databank uses the images from the story reels on the Bad Batch pages, and they wouldn't be in the Databank if they weren't "canon".

http://www.starwars.com/databank/clone- ... -bad-batch
http://www.starwars.com/databank/crosshair-bad-batch
http://www.starwars.com/databank/hunter-bad-batch
http://www.starwars.com/databank/tech-bad-batch
http://www.starwars.com/databank/wrecke ... c-marauder
http://www.starwars.com/databank/anaxes

Trust your feelings young padawan. You know it is true.

[Darth Spock]

This clone could probably match or better "I have five times your strength" Khan in an arm wrestle.

Now that's a versus I'd pay to see! :D

I note that the Republic gunship is light enough to be righted by an extra-strong clone, and that a knife is useful for killing droids. The gunship door was also blaster-proof, and shooting a droid popper somehow enhances it.

What is that Hollywood notion about where shooting a thing makes it do multiple times the same amount of whatever it was doing?

Knifing droids, hmm? I at least hope it's a "vibro-blade." I'm not that surprised otherwise though. The idea that B1 battle droids are just mass produced pieces of junk got good confirmation in "Nomad Droids" I believe, where the Separatists were melting down random droids for scrap for "Grievous' war machine." No high end armor on those grunts.
When I saw the rest of the arc, I thought maybe those "grenades" that were shot were perhaps instead like the bank shot devices Crosshair used later, but apparently not. Even with the unfinished visuals, it definitely looks to be a popper. *shrug*

[Mr. Oragahn]

"Outside of Hidalgo, the only thing making this canon would be ... nothing."

Just logic.

"If Lucas didn't chose to finish the show before selling his property, it means he didn't consider it worth finishing."

Ah, I see. I don't think you are aware of the history. As far as Lucas seems to have been aware, TCW was going to truck on. His statements at the time were that he wanted Star Wars and his company to be someplace safe and protected.

Then the Disney layoffs and Lucas-named company shutdowns began. And TCW got the axe because they couldn't just move it to a Disney network by contract. And Disney is mixing in the EU, making a new screwed-up universe. Oops.

In short, it went to crap all around. And so we get Rebels, where Season 2 appears to want to pretend to be TCW Season 23 or so, but ain't, because this is a new universe. But, we get 7, 8, & 9, reboot-style, so whatever.

I certainly don't share your logic at all. It remains rather disconnected from Lucas' plans, but I'll adress that part before going into the meat of this subtopic.

I wasn't aware of Lucas' bizarre plans. The story of him wanting to put his company someplace safe and protected rings strange to me. Do we have more details about this? Because as far as it went, it's hard to imagine how his company could be more protected than in the hands of people he's known and has been working with for ages, in a place owned by said mother company, which has more than enough financial resources to guarantee its own legal and structural protection. It clearly was in a better position than say MGM (owned by MGM Holdings, so it's a rather well locked structure).
If it was meant as a way for the company to be part of a house that now owns its network and has managed TV and movie properties for ages, that perhaps might make sense, but the wording isn't exactly stellar. By doing so, he essentially made his company lose the independance it enjoyed. With the numerous networks of diffusion for both theaters, tv and web, all this competition rather played in its advantage.
Also, it is puzzling that Lucasfilm's lawyers wouldn't have spotted the caveat about TCW not being portable to Disney's own recent diffusion channel, according to a clause which I guess was stipulated in some contract Lucasfilm would have signed with another company before the buyout. This form of mistake is not believable one moment, but with so little information, maybe I missed something here?
Anyway, it's Star Wars we're talking about here. How could that franchise fail to find contractors?
And in the case Lucasfilm would be in such cahoots that it would indeed have such issues, then and only then would have been a time when the company would be considered in need of someplace safe. But as it were, I'm not really getting what kind of safer environment it needed. The company's life and future seemed pretty well secure.

"Anything pertaining to the fictional work but not officially released is best considered rough production material, notes. If Lucas had released a piece of script he wrote on the back of a paper enveloppe, but which didn't find its way into a final product, it wouldn't be canonical in the slightest. It would just remain as material left on the cut floor, so to speak."

I have already given a superior analogy in regards to a shot, scored, and edited ENT Season 5 being released, not to mention TCW's "Lost Missions" Season 6 being released, like these are, in streaming form. Your notes comparison is less analogous and a bit circular.

Indeed, on notes, we agree. TCW scripts that weren't nearly complete a la the story reels are either fodder for Filoni or else being converted to other formats. I don't accept those as original-universe canon.

Finally, I wonder if perhaps you are rolling with an old-fashioned view of web material. A few years ago web material was some strange concept for TV network people … low-budget dithered .avi crap at best, enemy territory at worst. But with modern webisodes, completely-streamed series, and even streaming networks that only later expand from the web to broadcast (e.g. Glenn Beck's network The Blaze), the old lines are blurring.

Paramount's policy regarding nearly finished material only concerns Paramount.
As far as it goes for LFL, as long as the material isn't licensed and officially released under a finished state available for (most of the time) commercial use, it remains as construction material. No matter how advanced.
As a better example, there's been quite a number of big budget video games, some of which were very advanced in their development, which were aborted at what would seem the last moment. We'd say they never made it, and that's the truth of it. Not there, not canon.

As long as it's not officially packaged and distributed, it's not done. If it's not done, unless a specific in-house statement clarifies the situation, the material is not part of the canon, regardless of the intent. Owners and producers can intend a lot of things that don't come to fruition.

That's a simple and straight forward rule, a pretty solid logic, for me anyway.

But, for the enjoyment and sanity of all, Hidalgo was allowed to make this material canonical so that's good. At least we're ok on that! :)

I take issue with your ICS comparison to Mike, but hope in the above are the clues to determine why.

Essentially, as I read it (I could be wrong), Mike claims that overall source A is to be considered canon because some bits were referenced in an officially endorsed, published and wrapped material B, the later being clearly canonical.
The flawed "canonical by association" method is not that different from what ICSers attempted to do, although in fact this could be said of pretty much all of the EU completists who applied this logic and declared the whole of the EU canonical (or at least some of its books) on the same principles of minute correspondances; that of some transfer of material or even just references therefore making the original source entirely canonical.
It's plain bogus.

Mr. Oragahn wrote:

That's a logic quite broken, sharing a similarity with the ICS being canonical because it's based on production material (that never was canon since, well, it's only production material).
As far as we know, no one who reads those reels will ever know about the new elements before they're properly introduced in the released fictional material. So those references might as well not exist.

Disney also gave itself the liberty to exploit the old EU at length. Although they declared it as external to their canon, the logic you use would mean that said EU is both part of the canon and outside of it, just because Disney uses elements from the old EU for its new material, therefore making the entirety of the EU part of the canon.

The only thing that I am aware of that Clone Force 99/Bad Batch has appeared in are the story reels, and the Databank uses the images from the story reels on the Bad Batch pages, and they wouldn't be in the Databank if they weren't "canon".

http://www.starwars.com/databank/clone- ... -bad-batch
http://www.starwars.com/databank/crosshair-bad-batch
http://www.starwars.com/databank/hunter-bad-batch
http://www.starwars.com/databank/tech-bad-batch
http://www.starwars.com/databank/wrecke ... c-marauder
http://www.starwars.com/databank/anaxes

Trust your feelings young padawan. You know it is true.

Thank you for the list, but it's not exactly relevant.
These elements are diffused on the official website because they're considered canonical (Hidalgo's statement), not the other way round.

[2046]

I wasn't aware of Lucas' bizarre plans. The story of him wanting to put his company someplace safe and protected rings strange to me. Do we have more details about this?

Bizarre? Not if you understand this: http://www.empireonline.com/interviews/ ... p?IID=1714

As for more detail:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012 ... star-tours

Also, it is puzzling that Lucasfilm's lawyers wouldn't have spotted the caveat about TCW not being portable to Disney's own recent diffusion channel, according to a clause which I guess was stipulated in some contract Lucasfilm would have signed with another company before the buyout. This form of mistake is not believable one moment, but with so little information, maybe I missed something here?

There was probably a buyout option with Cartoon Network that would've let them move the series that Disney decided not to pay for, and/or CN played hardball. Either would be likely among those two competitors, and rumor has it there is little good will between them.

The idea of S6 being released as mere "bonus content" probably let them release what they had by letter of the contract, if not in spirit.

http://www.cinemablend.com/television/S ... 53541.html

"Anything pertaining to the fictional work but not officially released is best considered rough production material, notes. If Lucas had released a piece of script he wrote on the back of a paper enveloppe, but which didn't find its way into a final product, it wouldn't be canonical in the slightest. It would just remain as material left on the cut floor, so to speak."

I have already given a superior analogy in regards to a shot, scored, and edited ENT Season 5 being released, not to mention TCW's "Lost Missions" Season 6 being released, like these are, in streaming form. Your notes comparison is less analogous and a bit circular.

Indeed, on notes, we agree. TCW scripts that weren't nearly complete a la the story reels are either fodder for Filoni or else being converted to other formats. I don't accept those as original-universe canon.

Finally, I wonder if perhaps you are rolling with an old-fashioned view of web material. A few years ago web material was some strange concept for TV network people … low-budget dithered .avi crap at best, enemy territory at worst. But with modern webisodes, completely-streamed series, and even streaming networks that only later expand from the web to broadcast (e.g. Glenn Beck's network The Blaze), the old lines are blurring.

Paramount's policy regarding nearly finished material only concerns Paramount.

You're evading the analogy.

As far as it goes for LFL, as long as the material isn't licensed and officially released under a finished state available for (most of the time) commercial use, it remains as construction material. No matter how advanced.

Circular logic ... and based on absolutely nothing real.

Owners and producers can intend a lot of things that don't come to fruition.

Yes, but if ownership changes and a solid future dies, why suddenly ignore what is released differently?

Again, your argument seems to reject Season 6. I have tried to get you to say one way or another what your view is. Will you answer whether you think Season 6 of TCW is or isn't canon? Not Disney canon, I mean original pre-Disney canon.

[Mr. Oragahn]

I wasn't aware of Lucas' bizarre plans. The story of him wanting to put his company someplace safe and protected rings strange to me. Do we have more details about this?

Bizarre? Not if you understand this: http://www.empireonline.com/interviews/ ... p?IID=1714

As for more detail:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012 ... star-tours

Thanks for the links.
The first source is a most interesting read, although largely for irrelevant reasons.
However, the second one doesn't provide that much more details. So GL was looking for a bigger structure and wanted out of business. Mmm...
Was he fed up, to the point of not even caring that much about finishing the ongoing CW series?

Paramount's policy regarding nearly finished material only concerns Paramount.

You're evading the analogy.

It's an analogy, nothing more.
Why what Paramount does should have any weight on how SW material is handled, regarding its canon?

As far as it goes for LFL, as long as the material isn't licensed and officially released under a finished state available for (most of the time) commercial use, it remains as construction material. No matter how advanced.

Circular logic ... and based on absolutely nothing real.

Circular? Why?
Canonizing them isn't based on anything real either, save perhaps something similar Paramount did (and did they?), which for obvious reasons only concerns Paramount anyway. How was this 5th season of Enterprise canonized anyway?

For ages, fans only took as canon official material clearly released as finished, completed. Books, movies, shows. Now games. Why would that change?
Anything left on the floor, without any in-house statement, and whatever the reasons were, wasn't considered canonical, even the most polished cuts, until said cuts would find their way in a special edition or director's cut on a DVD, HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. There are plenty of reasons for the cut scenes not to make it into a movie or a show, but these reasons were hardly considered relevant.

Owners and producers can intend a lot of things that don't come to fruition.

Yes, but if ownership changes and a solid future dies, why suddenly ignore what is released differently?

Let's understand what you mean by differently. If it's still raw material which for some reason, would either be released on an official website as "stuff that never made it unfortunately", or on CD in cereal boxes, that hardly makes a difference.

Now, if the material, after a buyout for example, gets retouched and then packaged for an official release, then we're dealing with a different product; a finished one.

Again, your argument seems to reject Season 6. I have tried to get you to say one way or another what your view is. Will you answer whether you think Season 6 of TCW is or isn't canon? Not Disney canon, I mean original pre-Disney canon.

Anything not published as a properly wrapped and completed and official product, ready for user consumption, regardless of the diffusion channel (web, printed discs, movie theaters, audio, books, etc.) and eventually (if not preferably) registered in some national association's registry, with an adequate serial number or something of similar role attached to the product, isn't canonical.

This rule of thumb has always been straightforward and works rather well. I've seldom seen it ignored.
Other circumstances may require a case by case analysis.
For one, a completed material released doesn't necessarily mean the parent company incorporates it into its home canon.

[2046]

Was he fed up, to the point of not even caring that much about finishing the ongoing CW series?

He wanted to retire, yes, but he and Filoni were talking TCW even after the sale over lunches.

http://www.starwars.com/news/interview- ... ive-part-3

You're evading the analogy.

It's an analogy, nothing more.
Why what Paramount does should have any weight on how SW material is handled, regarding its canon?

(headdesk)

It is an analogy of principle. Feigning ignorance and density just reinforces that you recognize it presents a problem for your argument.

Canonizing them isn't based on anything real either, save perhaps something similar Paramount did (and did they?), which for obvious reasons only concerns Paramount anyway. How was this 5th season of Enterprise canonized anyway?

(headdesk)

I *thought* you were feigning, at least.

For ages, fans only took as canon official material clearly released as finished, completed. Books, movies, shows. Now games. Why would that change?

Because original universe followers might be of the mind that the new owners cut down something in its prime, so the mostly complete items released to the public ... broadcast to all ... are as close as they are going to get to the future the destroyers took. Melodramatic, but hopefully clear. It is, as you said, a special case.

Now, if the material, after a buyout for example, gets retouched and then packaged for an official release, then we're dealing with a different product; a finished one.

The story reels have been packaged and released online, much like S6. The animation quality is just lower. QED.

Again, your argument seems to reject Season 6. I have tried to get you to say one way or another what your view is. Will you answer whether you think Season 6 of TCW is or isn't canon? Not Disney canon, I mean original pre-Disney canon.

Anything not published as a properly wrapped and completed and official product, ready for user consumption, regardless of the diffusion channel (web, printed discs, movie theaters, audio, books, etc.) and eventually (if not preferably) registered in some national association's registry, with an adequate serial number or something of similar role attached to the product, isn't canonical.

Wow. What an odd standard in that last half.

So anyway, S6 ... yes or no?

Either way, I don't see anything particularly interesting in your arguments. You speak of wrapping and packaging and releasing, but it was properly released. The animation quality is lower, explained away as it being unfinished, but everything else is there. I see no reason to ignore it simply because the new owners started ripping up the universe and the company that built it in favor of a newer, crappier universe.

[Mr. Oragahn]

(headdesk)

It is an analogy of principle. Feigning ignorance and density just reinforces that you recognize it presents a problem for your argument.


(headdesk)

I *thought* you were feigning, at least.

It represents no such thing. It's still just an analogy, nothing more. I think you have simply decided that it suited your personnal views on how to handle the canonical status of some material from another entirely different franchise.
But maybe there's some miscommunication going on here?
Perhaps if you would describe the way Paramount handled the 5th season of ENT in sufficient details, you may save yourself some headaches? :)

Because original universe followers might be of the mind that the new owners cut down something in its prime, so the mostly complete items released to the public ... broadcast to all ... are as close as they are going to get to the future the destroyers took. Melodramatic, but hopefully clear. It is, as you said, a special case.

Which would prove it's only a question of personnal inclinations then, nothing more.
Some followers, perhaps emotionally involved in the product, would go as far as to declare it canonical no matter what.
Clearly, it is not a rule.

Now, if the material, after a buyout for example, gets retouched and then packaged for an official release, then we're dealing with a different product; a finished one.

The story reels have been packaged and released online, much like S6. The animation quality is just lower. QED.

And you were the one suggesting I was at odds with contemporary uses of Internet!
In the age of Youtube, Twitch and social medias, publishing content is absurdly easy. So releasing stuff on Internet in itself proves very little.
The part you quoted implied that the product was intended as being released as a finished product, in opposition to a non-finished one, as raw.
The reels are still raw material. You could say almost done, but it turns out this is not the first work of fiction that does not see the light because of legal and/or commercial technicalities.

Anything not published as a properly wrapped and completed and official product, ready for user consumption, regardless of the diffusion channel (web, printed discs, movie theaters, audio, books, etc.) and eventually (if not preferably) registered in some national association's registry, with an adequate serial number or something of similar role attached to the product, isn't canonical.

Wow. What an odd standard in that last half.

Actually not so much. Think of it. It's just an overly technical way to say that the publisher has officially released the product under a finished, publicly declared form.
Books have an ISBN. There's an International Standard Number of the main types of supports, but it's not equally used as far as movies and shows are concerned. (ISAN).

Still, if the ISAN system was internationally accepted, the rules that apply to books would be the same for audiovisual material.

So anyway, S6 ... yes or no?

S6 reels, outside of any statement from the owner in favour of their canonization: for me it's a clear no, until the owners decide to regularize the status (or don't).

Although we know that with material that is so close to being finished, if concerned parties feel the material worthwhile, it's up to them to canonize it the way they see fit.
That's why I'm not too concerned in such cases, because if all parties sufficiently want the product to be accepted as part of the lore, chances of a canonizing statement made from the owners would be high enough.

Luckily here, it's precisely what happened, with the statement by Hidalgo, on behalf of LucasFilm.

Either way, I don't see anything particularly interesting in your arguments. You speak of wrapping and packaging and releasing, but it was properly released. The animation quality is lower, explained away as it being unfinished, but everything else is there. I see no reason to ignore it simply because the new owners started ripping up the universe and the company that built it in favor of a newer, crappier universe.

And yet, owners they are.
"Unfinished" obviously does not make for a proper release. A proper release guarantees that all steps in the production and publishing of a product are checked.
This includes the polishing and the readiness of the material to be published on classical commercial channels as a finished product. Your average consumer would hate to hear that season 6 is out, only to realize that after having paid for it, they're served a non-finished product. That would simply not happen.
Putting the raw thing on Internet doesn't count.

[2046]

There's a gulf between us on this matter. And as this is my third attempt at a reply (browser crash and laptop-non-sleeping till battery exhaustion ate the first two), I'll be somewhat brief. Well, for me, anyway.

1. There is no fifth season of Enterprise.

2. The Clone Wars season six as released on Netflix is canon. I can't imagine any valid argument against their being so. You're basically declaring them non-canon because they changed networks, and that's nutty. The story reels are the same.

3. The story reels are released material. This isn't non-fiction where you watch the changes of a script over time . . . no one would argue the antique versions thereof are canon. These are released stories.

By your logic, the original TNG and TOS are automatically nullified because their owners have now refinished them.

4. I don't understand why you keep trying to argue that they're not seeing the light of day or are unreleased, or why you'd make fantastically weird arguments about ISBN numbers and that they have to fulfill their internal checklist from prior episodes and be ready for commercial purchase by fans. That's just crazy talk, slinging up new ad hoc goalposts that have never been part of any previous canonicity discussion.

5. As Lucas has said, no film is ever finished . . . it just gets to a point where you release it. You wouldn't even know they were unfinished if it weren't for them being advertised as such. They could've released them as "new crappy graphics edition TCW" ... though given your unique opinion of S6 canonicity that probably wouldn't change anything for you.

6. I understand your urge to take a hard line "it ain't canon until someone says it's canon" approach. I share it. But to suddenly reject the canonicity of a piece of the same body of known-canon work because of a change of venue is just odd. I wish it was that easy to flip canon on its ear . . . I'd have booted "These are the Voyages" long ago.

[Mr. Oragahn]

There's a gulf between us on this matter. And as this is my third attempt at a reply (browser crash and laptop-non-sleeping till battery exhaustion ate the first two), I'll be somewhat brief. Well, for me, anyway.

If you're about to post a detailed reply, I couldn't insist more on using some form of basic notepad software. It saves a lot of fists of rage when the computer fails you. ;)

1. There is no fifth season of Enterprise.

You mean, officially, as a totally wrapped and finished product ready for commercial release?
Because you mentioned that fifth season as part of your analogy and it could have only been somewhat relevant if Paramount had released material intended for a fifth season, although not packaged in a proper form as the other seasons were.
I'm not much into Trek canon anyway.

2. The Clone Wars season six as released on Netflix is canon. I can't imagine any valid argument against their being so. You're basically declaring them non-canon because they changed networks, and that's nutty. The story reels are the same.

This is just not my argument at all. We were talking about the reels, not the finished material properly published under the seal of "Lost Missions" on Netflix.
The reels were meant to be part of this 6th season as I get it, although some fans who have made montages of those reels on YT like to say it would be a 7th season.
You can reread my posts, at no point I claim the Lost Missions to be aprocryphal. We're talking about the reels here.
Reels are part of the Legacy set of materials:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars ... ars_Legacy
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_War ... _series%29

3. The story reels are released material. This isn't non-fiction where you watch the changes of a script over time . . . no one would argue the antique versions thereof are canon. These are released stories.

They are narrative chunks. As we know, for movies, cutscenes tend to be better finished, even sometimes entirely polished, and yet left on the cutting floor.
And despite all that, they also end on DVDs or BRs. As I explained, being released isn't sufficient. It's only one parameter. One can release any production material, of varying polish. That doesn't make them canonical.
The reels, at this point, were stuck at the animatics level and it's pretty much certain many people who watched the show don't even know those reels were released. Not to say that of those who watched some of them, they'd dismiss them on the grounds that they look like crap.
Since it's all up to anybody's own rule, there cannot be any agreement other than, precisely, due to the disagreements, those reels can't be considered part of the canon without any dispute.
Yes, one could say it was a tricky state, and thankfully, it was settled fast enough with Hidalgo's statement. So we can retain the narrative content of those reels, at least.

By your logic, the original TNG and TOS are automatically nullified because their owners have now refinished them.

I'm sorry but you will have to explain in further details how my logic would have me hold such a bizarre position.
If anything, refinished just means they're made canonical again, under a freshier form.

4. I don't understand why you keep trying to argue that they're not seeing the light of day or are unreleased, or why you'd make fantastically weird arguments about ISBN numbers and that they have to fulfill their internal checklist from prior episodes and be ready for commercial purchase by fans. That's just crazy talk, slinging up new ad hoc goalposts that have never been part of any previous canonicity discussion.

There's nothing fantastically weird about the ISBN system really. It's the definitive proof that a commercial book has been released and printed in proper form in the modern era, ready for selling at a world scale. After all, we're talking about commercial materials here. It's a quick and dirty way to sort ouf fanon from official material for example, but covers more.
These days, there is nothing unusual about extra fluff being released on websites or unrelated commercial products (cereal boxes, soda cans). You can even have the official seals and all that, but this doesn't cut it as to know if these snippets of fluff are canonical or not.
If you want an analogy that does work and which I'll immediately document, we will consider the special extra Halo materials known as the Cortana letters and the quite convoluted yet funny I love bees case. All of which required specific official statements despite their clear relation to the material and the implication of Bungie; the former got accepted but under special circumstances, the later moving back and forth between canon and apocrypha, with a former statement making the material apocrypha, until a newer one partly reversed this some two years later, probably because of the number of references to ILB made in other official products.
Those are just examples and prove little as to how Disney handles its canon.

5. As Lucas has said, no film is ever finished . . . it just gets to a point where you release it. You wouldn't even know they were unfinished if it weren't for them being advertised as such. They could've released them as "new crappy graphics edition TCW" ... though given your unique opinion of S6 canonicity that probably wouldn't change anything for you.

Your arguments are frail, they won't work here!
Not only because it's clear the reels were not released on any typical commercial licensed channel for viewing and consumption, which would already make anyone cautious about it, but also because you don't need anyone to tell you those reels aren't finished to notice that, indeed, they are; especially if you've already watched the former seasons.
Even a toddler would give you a quizzical look about those reels, the kind of WTF is that dad?

6. I understand your urge to take a hard line "it ain't canon until someone says it's canon" approach. I share it. But to suddenly reject the canonicity of a piece of the same body of known-canon work because of a change of venue is just odd. I wish it was that easy to flip canon on its ear . . . I'd have booted "These are the Voyages" long ago.

I'd say it's keeping in line with the hardline logic. It's particularly safer that way.

[Lucky]

Thank you for the list, but it's not exactly relevant.

You seem to be arbitrarily hand waving evidence away with no justification just because it contradicts your stance.

The pages show the Bad Batch story reals getting the same treatment by Disney as the OT, PT, SW:TCW, and Rebels.

If the Bad Batch story reals are being treated in the same manner as the known canon material by the company then why aren't they also canon beyond your opinion?

These elements are diffused on the official website because they're considered canonical (Hidalgo's statement), not the other way round.

1) Referring to things listed in alphabetical order as "DIFFUSED" strikes me as odd. It sounds as if you didn't even read the addresses you did a rather half-assed job of copying and pasting?

2) You are going to need to show this Hidalgo guy who ever he is has the kind of pull in the company that you claim. All I can find on the guy is that he seems to have a blog on Starwars.com which would seemingly make him a mouth peace for the company I guess, but that would place him in the know which would hurt your case, and wrote a few books most of which seem to be Legends level, but nothing that shows he can get things put into the databank like you are claiming.

If this Hidalgo guy has the absurd amount of power in the company you seem to be claiming, then arguing against his judgement is pointless because he is the one who decides what is and isn't canon going by you arguments here.

If this Hidalgo guy doesn't have the powers you prescribe to him then someones else higher on the food chain agrees with him, and is treating the Bad Batch story reals as canon.



You may also want to show that the requirements for being canon match your rather extreme sounding standard.

[Mr. Oragahn]

There's not a single paragraph, not a single line of what you typed that is free of any gross error and massive deformation of my own words.
If you don't know who Hidalgo is, learn about him first.
Also, read this thread thoroughly before posting in a rush after a long pause.
Your late intervention is the worst aspect of necrotic activity and I perhaps enjoy answering this merely for my own personnal amusement.

Thank you for the list, but it's not exactly relevant.

You seem to be arbitrarily hand waving evidence away with no justification just because it contradicts your stance.

The justification of this "handwaving" is actually one line below the piece you quoted. Dissociating elements makes the understanding complicated.
So consider reading both lines together and you'll see there's nothing arbitrary at all.

The pages show the Bad Batch story reals getting the same treatment by Disney as the OT, PT, SW:TCW, and Rebels.

They're on the site for the reason I gave. It's chronological. They're present on this site because of the official canonization of elements by Hidalgo. Not the reverse.

If the Bad Batch story reals are being treated in the same manner as the known canon material by the company then why aren't they also canon beyond your opinion?

The narrative of these animatics is accepted in the canon.

These elements are diffused on the official website because they're considered canonical (Hidalgo's statement), not the other way round.

1) Referring to things listed in alphabetical order as "DIFFUSED" strikes me as odd.

OK, published then. But diffused does work, still.

It sounds as if you didn't even read the addresses you did a rather half-assed job of copying and pasting?

You are the one who provided those links: http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... 086#p52086
In your haste, can't you see that the quotation is of you? Do I need to mock you more?

2) You are going to need to show this Hidalgo guy who ever he is has the kind of pull in the company that you claim. All I can find on the guy is that he seems to have a blog on Starwars.com which would seemingly make him a mouth peace for the company I guess, but that would place him in the know which would hurt your case, and wrote a few books most of which seem to be Legends level, but nothing that shows he can get things put into the databank like you are claiming.

If this Hidalgo guy has the absurd amount of power in the company you seem to be claiming, then arguing against his judgement is pointless because he is the one who decides what is and isn't canon going by you arguments here.

If this Hidalgo guy doesn't have the powers you prescribe to him then someones else higher on the food chain agrees with him, and is treating the Bad Batch story reals as canon.

He's been discussed at length on SFJN, and RSA (2046) has a website that deals with SW's canon too.

You may also want to show that the requirements for being canon match your rather extreme sounding standard.

I don't have to.

[Lucky]

There's not a single paragraph, not a single line of what you typed that is free of any gross error and massive deformation of my own words.

Attack the person rather then the argument, I'm pretty sure this is against the rules..

If you don't know who Hidalgo is, learn about him first.

I tried, and couldn't find anything beyond what I talked about.

Also, read this thread thoroughly before posting in a rush after a long pause.

I do, and that is part of why it takes so long for me to post along with real life.

Your late intervention is the worst aspect of necrotic activity and I perhaps enjoy answering this merely for my own personnal amusement.

So because I do read through, and try to do research, you think I don't post quickly enough.

The justification of this "handwaving" is actually one line below the piece you quoted. Dissociating elements makes the understanding complicated.
So consider reading both lines together and you'll see there's nothing arbitrary at all.

Thank you for the list, but it's not exactly relevant.
These elements are diffused on the official website because they're considered canonical (Hidalgo's statement), not the other way round.

You appear to be ignoring everything I said all the while claiming the story reels are canon, but they aren't because you say so... You're contradicting yourself?

They're on the site for the reason I gave. It's chronological. They're present on this site because of the official canonization of elements by Hidalgo. Not the reverse.

Straw men

Being on Starwars.com was never relevant to anything I said. It is the fact that the Bad Batch story reels are listed in the DataBank that is relevant.

The narrative of these animatics is accepted in the canon.

Which does not answer the question I asked.

OK, published then. But diffused does work, still.

No it does not work. By using the word diffused improperly, you stated that information about the Bad Batch story reels could be found at many locations on StarWars.com.

You are the one who provided those links: viewtopic.php?p=52086#p52086
In your haste, can't you see that the quotation is of you? Do I need to mock you more?

Your lack of a proper quoting is an insult, and just sloppy and lazy.

He's been discussed at length on SFJN, and RSA (2046) has a website that deals with SW's canon too.

And why should I believe you to be telling me the truth after you insult me and try to bait me into insulting you?

I don't have to.

Per standard rules of evidence or concede the point.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Attack the person rather then the argument, I'm pretty sure this is against the rules..

Your victimization routine is getting tiring. You tried it several times in the last months, either posing yourself as one or suddenly declaring that I was attacking entire nations or people with my opinions.
You should learn about making the difference between insulting someone and criticizing the methods, ways, so on.
I this case, I made a judgement on the overall quality of your answer, which was subpar.

I tried, and couldn't find anything beyond what I talked about.

Then you didn't try hard because it is not complicated to find stuff about him here.
Since you claim to read a thread in its entirety, you could perhaps use a mix of CTRL+F and Hidalgo as a keyword and already find stuff, because we did talk about him quite recently.

Your late intervention is the worst aspect of necrotic activity and I perhaps enjoy answering this merely for my own personnal amusement.

So because I do read through, and try to do research, you think I don't post quickly enough.

you're reight of postin aint not teh prolbems

You appear to be ignoring everything I said all the while claiming the story reels are canon, but they aren't because you say so... You're contradicting yourself?

The reels, as a whole, are a topic I already covered. Why, on their own merit, I didn't consider them canonical is explained before.
As a matter of fact, there isn't a single piece of evidence I'm aware of that presents them as canonical material as a whole.
What I recognize as part of the canon is what Hidalgo declared as being canonical.

Also, it begs to be reminded that the Databank was hardly accepted as a high level authoritative source for all the time of its existence, on any subject, not just about what is part of the canon or not, and that even by EU fans.
For one, because it kept changing and because each update erases the former page, when it's not an entire section that gets dumped. It also kept picking data at random when there were conflicting sources.
In other words, it has a poor track record of being reliable.

They're on the site for the reason I gave. It's chronological. They're present on this site because of the official canonization of elements by Hidalgo. Not the reverse.

Straw men

Being on Starwars.com was never relevant to anything I said. It is the fact that the Bad Batch story reels are listed in the DataBank that is relevant.

The Databank only exists on Starwars.com, so it's actually totally relevant. In all logic, the material (you linked to) is there precisely because of its particular canonization through an official statement.

Btw, it's strawman, as strawman argument, not strawmen. And it wasn't even a strawman to begin with: I wasn't putting words in your mouth.

The narrative of these animatics is accepted in the canon.

Which does not answer the question I asked.

You asked this:

If the Bad Batch story reals are being treated in the same manner as the known canon material by the company then why aren't they also canon beyond your opinion?

Is there any proof that the entire yet unfinished material is made part of the canon by any official statement?
It's not up to me to prove that.

He's been discussed at length on SFJN, and RSA (2046) has a website that deals with SW's canon too.

And why should I believe you to be telling me the truth after you insult me and try to bait me into insulting you?

You see insults where there's mere non-favourable descriptions of your writings. You're behaving like an author who would keep claiming being bullied because people would only leave an average of two stars out of five as ratings to his book on Amazon.

But don't believe me if you want, I'm evil, ok, you seriously have got a fine excuse for not bothering looking for facts.

Per standard rules of evidence or concede the point.

Funny one. I don't have to prove a negative. The evidence about what is canon or not requires quoting official statements. Otherwise, it's up to the plebe, geeks, to decide what they want to see as part of the canon of a given set of fictional material. In other words, opinion.

[Lucky]

Your victimization routine is getting tiring. You tried it several times in the last months, either posing yourself as one or suddenly declaring that I was attacking entire nations or people with my opinions.

You should learn about making the difference between insulting someone and criticizing the methods, ways, so on.
I this case, I made a judgement on the overall quality of your answer, which was subpar.

You're the only one who is doing the victimization thing here.

Then you didn't try hard because it is not complicated to find stuff about him here.
Since you claim to read a thread in its entirety, you could perhaps use a mix of CTRL+F and Hidalgo as a keyword and already find stuff, because we did talk about him quite recently.

Without clear sources I don't trust it, and in your case, you've made claims to me in the past that have turned out to be stuff you've apparently just stuff made up.

Pablo Hidalgo was a member of the Lucasfilm Story Group who's job from what I can find on Wookiepedia is to try to make a coherent story with all of the Star Wars material that is being released.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Pablo_Hidalgo

Pablo Hidalgo's job title was "Brand Communications Manager". What is the job of the "Brand Communications Manager"?
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Lucasfilm_Story_Group

I found RSA's source that says that the Story Group wants the Story reels to be canon along with the rest of the Clone wars material.

Between the Clone Wars Legacy video and the Data Bank pages there are two peaces of evidence that say the Bad Batch story reels are canon even if the evidence is imperfect, but it is there.

What evidence is there that the BBSR are not canon?

The reels, as a whole, are a topic I already covered. Why, on their own merit, I didn't consider them canonical is explained before.
As a matter of fact, there isn't a single piece of evidence I'm aware of that presents them as canonical material as a whole.
What I recognize as part of the canon is what Hidalgo declared as being canonical.

You're opinion is of no worth to me. Back it up, or walk away.

RSA's evidence is not perfect, but it does appear to say what he claims it does, and the Data Bank backs it up.

Also, it begs to be reminded that the Databank was hardly accepted as a high level authoritative source for all the time of its existence, on any subject, not just about what is part of the canon or not, and that even by EU fans.
For one, because it kept changing and because each update erases the former page, when it's not an entire section that gets dumped. It also kept picking data at random when there were conflicting sources.
In other words, it has a poor track record of being reliable.

1) And if you read what I posted, then you would realize that my point has nothing to do with the written content on the pages.

While the information may not be perfect, the Data Bank's purpose is to be a basic encyclopedia of Star Wars, and was always more trust worthy then sites like Wookiepedia which was over run with VS debaters and inflationist who honestly make stuff up.

2) You are equating the Data Bank to random blog entires while ignoring what it's purpose is and has always been. The Data Bank in any form, only had pages on "canon" things, and only having pages on "canon" things is the point.

When Disney purchased Star Wars, they started the Data Bank from scratch, and only put things from the 6 live action movies, Star Wars: The Clone Wars, Rebels, and now the Bad Batch Story Reels.

The Databank only exists on Starwars.com, so it's actually totally relevant. In all logic, the material (you linked to) is there precisely because of its particular canonization through an official statement.

The official Star Wars web site hosting the official Star Wars encyclopedia seems odd or improper to you? Where else should the company's official public Star Wars encyclopedia be hosted if not on the official public Star Wars company web site?

You really aren't making sense here.

Is there any proof that the entire yet unfinished material is made part of the canon by any official statement?
It's not up to me to prove that.

The video RSA in directly linked to says so, and the Data Bank entires support the video.

If you don't want to except those peaces of evidence, then you need to show some thing that invalidates them, but you haven't done that yet.

You see insults where there's mere non-favourable descriptions of your writings. You're behaving like an author who would keep claiming being bullied because people would only leave an average of two stars out of five as ratings to his book on Amazon.

But don't believe me if you want, I'm evil, ok, you seriously have got a fine excuse for not bothering looking for facts.

Horribly rude while not even approaching the argument.

Why should I believe you over someone who provided an official press release that seems to state the Story Reels are "canon" when you do not seem to have provided any evidence to support your case?

Funny one. I don't have to prove a negative. The evidence about what is canon or not requires quoting official statements. Otherwise, it's up to the plebe, geeks, to decide what they want to see as part of the canon of a given set of fictional material. In other words, opinion.

You have several problems with this line of reasoning as a defense of you position.

First, the evidence that something is "canon" is exactly the same as the evidence that something is not "canon", an official statement as you say. Your claim is as positive as someone who is stating the story reels are "canon". You aren't making a negative claim.

Secondly, you logic is horribly flawed. "You can't prove a negative" is a negative you are claiming you can be proven, and that means you are claiming you can prove a negative, but something cannot be both true and untrue at the same time.

Thirdly, any claim can be expressed as a negative or a positive. It is all just word play.