I'm asking because my argument is based on canonical hierarchy, i.e. movie > novel > comic, etc., so if your argument is assuming that all different sources are on equal standing then there's no point in continuing.
If the separate novelization is based on the deleted scene which is non-canon, then the novelization is literally based on something that didn't happen. Thus, we can dismiss it.
Lmao, the "logistical detail" (which is a funny way to phrase it, as if what I'm disputing is just a little, irrelevant tidbit) is a large contradiction to the plot of the film. I'm not disputing some throwaway dialogue from the book that isn't in the movie. The book has an added duel that contradicts the sequence of events in the plot of the film, which is pretty significant. Other fights that are adapted in certain novels at least have the benefit of having actually happened, lmfao. The movie's authority is above the book, thus you can't use the book's material that doesn't coincide with the canon plot of the film. Since when are parts of a novel exempt from being disregarded when the movie contradicts it?
Oops, it seems this was a complete waste of your time. I don't care about your Luminara argument, only the relationship between the deleted scene and the novel.
That being said, I do have to point out the glaringly obvious fact that Ventress did not pin Anakin to the wall with the Force in the excerpt you posted, but she "pinned" him by advancing towards him immediately after he fell to the floor, leaving him no room to move because he was up against the wall. She doesn't even pin him in the deleted scene either, lol.