Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://i.imgur.com/qEwEIef.png?1

I'd say it depends on the specific context and weight behind each perspective in the contradiction, which is more supported by lore, which source is more valid to the question at hand, etc.

They're the same level of canonicity and should be treated as such.

But they're contradictory and as far as I'm aware the canonicity of statements from EU authors was never addressed.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I'd say it depends on the specific context and weight behind each perspective in the contradiction, which is more supported by lore, which source is more valid to the question at hand, etc.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
But they're contradictory and as far as I'm aware the canonicity of statements from EU authors was never addressed.
Yes they were. Canon came in level of authority. Two C-Canon pieces of media were just as valid as each other. The fact that they're contradictory doesn't make anyone less valid than the other. It'd be open up to discussion in any debate, sure, but in the end, either would be valid for the purposes of showing feats.

an author statement only means something when it expresses authorial intent

Originally posted by FreshestSlice
Yes they were. Canon came in level of authority. Two C-Canon pieces of media were just as valid as each other. The fact that they're contradictory doesn't make anyone less valid than the other. It'd be open up to discussion in any debate, sure, but in the end, either would be valid for the purposes of showing feats.

Fair enough. Can you show me where the canonicity of author statements was addressed?