Board Thread:Lore Discussion/@comment-24.44.141.89-20131113224543/@comment-160529-20140101220315

Octo8 wrote: ...which seems to be exactly why he is so emotionally invested that MK's works should be considered non-canon...

see this wiki... a wiki is an enyclopedia... for real knowedlge. Not every single random thought of every fan of the franchise, one fan (Michael Kirkbride) gets a little more attention, and everyone falls over worshipping him and including every thing he wrote on pages as canon.

Its insulting and its misinformation.

and I woudl rther die, than misinform someone. If its one thing that I take abso-fucking-lutely seriously is the dissemination of accurate information.

You know why? so people can make up their own minds about things, so people can take the information and do with it what they want and need.

See the problem that you arent getting, is that by putting one persons fanon above others. One persons idiot head canon above others, we are taking away the right to their own.

Encyclopedias arent a place for feelings, or theories, or bullcrap... they are a place for information. First and foremost. Some people like to have accurate fan fiction, some people want to know all the FACTS...

Its irresponsible and idiotic to include anything that Kirkbride created outside of Bethesdas moderation. By the way, your definition of "canon" is wrong

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/canon?s=t

This is the one that is most important.

1. an ecclesiastical rule or law enacted by a council or other competent authority and, in the Roman Catholic Church, approved by the pope.

Bethesda is the competent authority here, the fans are not. Now they might take some advisement from the fans, but they have the final word.