Talk:Canon

Ok, everyone should respect the majority of fans who dislike the prequels and sequels. However I personally find the binary rejection 'canon vs non-canon' a bit unjust, and would like to bring this matter forth. I am proposing an article for a more flexible canon system, that considers 'levels' or 'priority' of canon. I would like everyone's opinions. I hope some admin sees this at some time. MoffRebus 18:44, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I praise your initiative. But I think the classification that has been used currently is good.

For me, FH's DUNE books are the Ultimate Canon, and the DUNE Encyclopedia should be considered the next level at the Expanded Universe, follow by the BH & KJA low-work. It isn't because the BH&KJA is permitted by the HLP that it should be Canon as the Frank works. The quality and the concordance with the originals have to be the only factor for the classification.

This is a wiki, we don't have to follow what copyright's owners tell to us. And is not because they forced McNellis to write a letter that we should give up of the Encyclopedia. There are many ideas developed together with Frank at DE.

Lisan Al-Gaib 01:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm OK with the opinion of non cannon for BH & KJA work. They were working off of outlines left behind by FH. They found the outlines in a bank's safety deposit box and they've done their best to bring the rest of the story to life. I've read all the Dune books and find that FH is the master and anyting else written is not as deep and unpredictable as FH work. Therefore I'm oK for FH beind Canon and All others being non canon. But in the end, I'm just happy to have more than just FH books for the Dune universe. AtreidesDZ 14:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Heh you got me wrong. The matter was not to canonize the prequels, but whether we should put a priority. I suggested that the works of BH should be considered superior to the Encyclopedia, yet Galdaran showed a preference to the Encyclopedia. So since we all agree that FH is ultimate canon, what should we do with other works? The Butlerian Jihad describes the layout of the prequels, yet the Butlerian of the DE is wholly different. Perhaps we should decide which works this wiki will prefer. MoffRebus 20:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe we should develop two articles for the Butlerian Jihad, for example. One related to the new books, and one related to DE. I think through that way we can cover that two works created for the Expanded Universe. Maybe we should create two different templates too (both EU, but one for the new books, and other for DE).

And AtreidesDZ, I think you shouldn't believe on everything that you read from them. I will only believe on that notes when I see it published in some book. I have a example for you: At the early times during the Hunters they said that the book was developed based on the full outline from the FH's notes. However, during their last interview, at the Sandworms Audio Book, they explicitly said the DUNE7 outline have only two-and-half pages and gave them only hints of what FH planned. Now, how can we believe in two big books being the true story if is based at so little outline? If you want to see the inteview's transcription, look at the jacurutu.com. Lisan Al-Gaib 04:42, 13 September 2008 (UTC)