Darth Maul(1 saber) vs. ESB Luke

No, not really. I'm just waiting for a question I asked to be answered before I respond. Although, I will address what Subjekt wrote:

In regards to what I said in that thread, I was clearly wrong about the game - as a whole - being considered non-canon. I hadn't delved into the subject of games that follow the movie were ranked. Apparently, only elements that contradict the film, and things that are strictly gameplay are non-canon.

At least, that's the answer I got when I asked in a thread on sw.com. So, whatever you mentioned in the thread that wasn't a contradiction (or gameplay), then it would seem it should stand. That was a mistake on my part.

The movie novelisations were based on an early draft of the script, and contradict the highest form of canon on multiple occasions. They're not canon.

"Q: Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?

A: In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron continuity database, January 24, 2004.

"The novelizations are written concurrently with the film's production, so variations in detail do creep in from time to time. Nonetheless, they should be regarded as very accurate depictions of the fictional Star Wars movies."

--Chris Cerasi and Steve Sansweet, Ask the Jedi Council, 2006.

"We have what we call Canon, which is the screenplays, novelizations, and other works that are directly tied into continuity"

-- Allan Kausch, The Secrets of Star Wars: Shadows of the Empire.

"Gospel, or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelizations. "

-- Sue Rostoni, Issue 23 of Star Wars Insider, 1994.

Well, I'm glad that you blatantly deny facts stated directly from two sources, Leland Chee being one of them. If you really believe this bullshit you spew, prove up. I'm rather sick and tired of you just being a phallus, and not accepting that you are clearly wrong.

In fact, you say "they're not canon" because they contradict on a few occasions, well if this is the case I'd ask why is SotME considered to fit in continuity? Leland Chee states that, as a whole, it's canon; the discrepancies are dealt with case-by-case. Even taking what I just addressed earlier in response to Subjekt's post, the video game contradictions to the movie are non-canon, whilst things that don't - aren't consider as such. So, that virtually destroys this part of the argument.

Moreover, by our canon policy, movie novelizations are canon. Leland Chee, who may I remind you maintains the continuity database of Lucas Licensing. states they are canon. Sue Rostoni states they are canon. Allan Kausch states they are canon. You? An unimportant, no-authority-to-make-the-call twit disagrees? BFD. You're wrong, I am right. Deal with it, son.

As a matter of fact, I doubt you'd find one source that says otherwise (as a whole, that is). And here's the kicker: the people who stated the aforementioned quotes all have theauthority to make the call, you do not. This is just plain ignorance and arrogance on your part. If you can't accept facts, then please stop debating with me right now. You're blatently disregarding authoritive quotes, and every time you post a reply: you're still wrong! The ridiculous assertion made by you has been defeated, that is a fact. Much like the facts novels are canon, and you are wrong.

I love how you think talk about logic, act as if you are a godlike debater, and think you're the smartest thing on the planet, yet you refuse to accept outright stated facts. Yes, you show very capable signs of being intelligent; so either you're just trying to be an ignorant jackass or you genuinely believe you think you can dictate canon over Leland Chee, and others who are employed by LFL. I'd say the former, probably. Nonetheless, it's annoying.

The rest, which really is only the matter of Qui-Gon and "ferocity", I will address later (in addition to the "much?" comment). This, which is a very simple thing to prove you wrong about, is just all I can give at this moment. I'm kind of busy, actually (writing a story, in fact), and am still awaiting an answer on something regarding this debate.

Maul wins easily.

Originally posted by Advent
No, not really. I'm just waiting for a question I asked to be answered before I respond. Although, I will address what Subjekt wrote:

In regards to what I said in that thread, I was clearly wrong about the game - as a whole - being considered non-canon. I hadn't delved into the subject of games that follow the movie were ranked. Apparently, only elements that contradict the film, and things that are strictly gameplay are non-canon.

At least, that's the answer I got when I asked in a thread on sw.com. So, whatever you mentioned in the thread that wasn't a contradiction (or gameplay), then it would seem it should stand. That was a mistake on my part.

OK thanks. Wasn't asking to be argumentative, i was seriously wondering about that. I mean debating isn't about who's right, it's about who can win, and i didnt know if you were just trying to win more or less, or what. But all good, no worries. Thanks for the response.

Originally posted by The Planet
'You fail, kid'?
A picture of a sock?
You did as good as calling me a sock, so please, stop. If you really want to get in a battle of wits with me, you will lose, so continue this if you will.

As good isn't actually doing it.

I never called you a sock. Technically.

And please kid, we'ev had this discussion before.

Originally posted by Blaxican
As good isn't actually doing it.

I never called you a sock. Technically.

Are you a moron? Whether you technically called me one or not, you made it clear that you believed I was one and wanted to point it out to everyone. My response 'For the last time, I am not a fecking sock' was a perfectly valid reply to you labelling me a sock, so if you're really trying to be a smartass, you're not doing a very good job of it. If I made the assertion that you directly called me one, then yes, you could say this, but my whole point was that it was clear that you were labelling me as one, so your smartass bs here really isn't working.

And please kid, we'ev had this discussion before.

Who the fvck are you to call me a kid? Please, being the number 1 dumbass on these forums (that's right, number 1, I bet even Kadesh could out debate you lol!), I suggest you be quiet.

Originally posted by Advent
No, not really. I'm just waiting for a question I asked to be answered before I respond. Although, I will address what Subjekt wrote:

In regards to what I said in that thread, I was clearly wrong about the game - as a whole - being considered non-canon. I hadn't delved into the subject of games that follow the movie were ranked. Apparently, only elements that contradict the film, and things that are strictly gameplay are non-canon.

At least, that's the answer I got when I asked in a thread on sw.com. So, whatever you mentioned in the thread that wasn't a contradiction (or gameplay), then it would seem it should stand. That was a mistake on my part.

"Q: Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?

A: [b]In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron continuity database, January 24, 2004.

"The novelizations are written concurrently with the film's production, so variations in detail do creep in from time to time. Nonetheless, they should be regarded as very accurate depictions of the fictional Star Wars movies."

--Chris Cerasi and Steve Sansweet, Ask the Jedi Council, 2006.

"We have what we call Canon, which is the screenplays, novelizations, and other works that are directly tied into continuity"

-- Allan Kausch, The Secrets of Star Wars: Shadows of the Empire.

"Gospel, or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelizations. "

-- Sue Rostoni, Issue 23 of Star Wars Insider, 1994.

Well, I'm glad that you blatantly deny facts stated directly from two sources, Leland Chee being one of them. If you really believe this bullshit you spew, prove up. I'm rather sick and tired of you just being a phallus, and not accepting that you are clearly wrong.

In fact, you say "they're not canon" because they contradict on a few occasions, well if this is the case I'd ask why is SotME considered to fit in continuity? Leland Chee states that, as a whole, it's canon; the discrepancies are dealt with case-by-case. Even taking what I just addressed earlier in response to Subjekt's post, the video game contradictions to the movie are non-canon, whilst things that don't - aren't consider as such. So, that virtually destroys this part of the argument.

Moreover, by our canon policy, movie novelizations are canon. Leland Chee, who may I remind you maintains the continuity database of Lucas Licensing. states they are canon. Sue Rostoni states they are canon. Allan Kausch states they are canon. You? An unimportant, no-authority-to-make-the-call twit disagrees? BFD. You're wrong, I am right. Deal with it, son.

As a matter of fact, I doubt you'd find one source that says otherwise (as a whole, that is). And here's the kicker: the people who stated the aforementioned quotes all have theauthority to make the call, you do not. This is just plain ignorance and arrogance on your part. If you can't accept facts, then please stop debating with me right now. You're blatently disregarding authoritive quotes, and every time you post a reply: you're still wrong! The ridiculous assertion made by you has been defeated, that is a fact. Much like the facts novels are canon, and you are wrong.

I love how you think talk about logic, act as if you are a godlike debater, and think you're the smartest thing on the planet, yet you refuse to accept outright stated facts. Yes, you show very capable signs of being intelligent; so either you're just trying to be an ignorant jackass or you genuinely believe you think you can dictate canon over Leland Chee, and others who are employed by LFL. I'd say the former, probably. Nonetheless, it's annoying.

The rest, which really is only the matter of Qui-Gon and "ferocity", I will address later (in addition to the "much?" comment). This, which is a very simple thing to prove you wrong about, is just all I can give at this moment. I'm kind of busy, actually (writing a story, in fact), and am still awaiting an answer on something regarding this debate. [/B]

Really Advent, you have your opinions, I have mine, we'll have to agree to disagree. One thing I will say is, while I strongly believe the novelisations not to be canon, I know that the fight scenes in the novelisations are not cannon - direct contradictions to the movies, so to stem back to the original point, you definitely can't use anything from the fight scenes of the novelisations, which renders your earlier points invalid.

then i'd invite you to go read ush's canon thread, and then come back.

and how do you come to conclusions about other people's debating skills after only a week and a half? You'd have to be around a little bit longer to know that.

man, i tore a hole in my sock....Planet, can i have one of yours?

j/k...

That's cute man.

Originally posted by The Planet
Really Advent, you have your opinions, I have mine, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Oh, yes. Of course I have my opinions, and you have your's. But, there's quite a difference in mine regarding this point, and your's.

Mine: Backed up by Leland Chee. Several quotes that disprove your ridiculous assertion that "novels aren't canon".
Yours: ...?

Really, there's nothing to "agree to disagree" about. I have authority backing me up, you don't. You can think (key) you're right, but the overall fact remains that I defeated this asinine point of yours.

Quite honestly, I've never met one more dense than you are.

One thing I will say is, while I strongly believe the novelisations not to be canon,

And that belief comes from where exactly? Obviously, I could see where you're coming from if you put aside quotes from Leland Chee, Allan Kausch, our own canon policy, and Sue Rostoni they are. However, this is a type of debate where we don't leave authorities' quotes out of the issue, ergo your "belief" is quite frankly wrong.

It's comical at best that you know you're wrong, yet won't admit it. If anything, I'd just like to ask why you disregard quotes from Leland Chee? And also if you really are incapable of understanding "plain as day" things?

I know that the fight scenes in the novelisations are not cannon

You know? Then time to prove up.

If a line in a novel contradicts the fight scene, then that line and that line only is counted as non-canon. Leland Chee has stated that discrepancies are dealt with case by case. So, try again.

- direct contradictions to the movies,

No, they aren't.

Again, anything that contradicts is dealt with case by case, anything seen or elaborated on in the movie is canon, anything that clearly didn't happen whatsoever is non-canon.

For example,

"Dooku's red blade stabbed hard into his left shoulder, and as he lurched back, Dooku retracted the blade and stabbed along its original course, digging into Obi-Wan's right thigh." (Attack of the Clones, Chp. 24)

"[...]he used his last burst of dark power to continue his spin into a blindingly fast wheel-kick that brought his heel against the point of Kenobi's chin with a crack like the report of a huge-bore slugthrower, knocking the Jedi Master back down the stairs. Sounded like he'd broken his neck." (Revenge of the Sith, Chp. 3)

The former doesn't contradict from the movies, it's canon and in a fight scene (as is majority of the fight scene in the novel of AotC). The latter, however, clearly never happened and is thus non-canon. But the point is that only that single contradiction is non-canon, not the entire scene.

And that's already been long established from my part using quotes from employees of LFL. Your side hasn't confirmed jack shit, except that you believe they are non-canon. You, who doesn't work for LFL, and has offered no proof whatsoever.

You really did lose on this point, and there is no "agree to disagree". You're simply wrong.

so to stem back to the original point, you definitely can't use anything from the fight scenes of the novelisations, which renders your earlier points invalid.

It does not render my points invalid because you are:

1. Wrong.
2. Pulling shit from your ass.
3. And flinging it around like a monkey.
4. Ignoring official quotes.
5. Ignoring facts.

You can use anything that isn't contradicted from a fight scene, as things that do contradict (another example, Maul doing a back flip over the melting pit) are non-canon and are dealt with "case-by-case" to ensure that the rest of the novel is canon.

Ok, it seems this topic is running for his original porpuse. Anyway, i think malak easily takes this one. In ESB Luke was not that great, in fact i doubt he could beat the most of jedi masters from the jedi order before the order 66...

Maul easily wins this one with his skill and ferocity. Also, if he need he could just use force push on luke just like he did on obi-wan, who had much more years to practise his lightsaber skill and his powers then luke.

Oh, yes. Of course I have my opinions, and you have your's. But, there's quite a difference in mine regarding this point, and your's.

Mine: Backed up by Leland Chee. Several quotes that disprove your ridiculous assertion that "novels aren't canon".
Yours: ...?
Really, there's nothing to "agree to disagree" about. I have authority backing me up, you don't. You can think (key) you're right, but the overall fact remains that I defeated this asinine point of yours.

No, the difference is, I actually base my assertions off logic; when a source constantly contradicts the highest form of canon, it shouldn't be considered credible. You, on the other hand, have listed a bunch of quotes from different Lucasarts officials, but haven't provided an explanation of how they prove that the movie novelisations are canon. Why? I'm guessing it's because you can't, as none of those quotes prove that the movie novelisations are canon, and I'll explain why now.

"Q: Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?

A: In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron continuity database, January 24, 2004.

This is great and all, but LC never said that the novelisations were canon (he actually kinda skirted the question, didn't directly respond), just that the parts that came from Lucas are. Now here's where your problem lies: whenever using anything from the novel, you have to prove that it actually came from Lucas, otherwise it simply can't be counted.

So unlucky, because this point goes nowhere in proving that the novelisations are canon.

"The novelizations are written concurrently with the film's production, so variations in detail do creep in from time to time. Nonetheless, they should be regarded as very accurate depictions of the fictional Star Wars movies."

--Chris Cerasi and Steve Sansweet, Ask the Jedi Council, 2006.

I agree that they should be regarded as accurate depictions, but that doesn't neccesarily make them canon. I can write a book based on the SW movies, I can make it so that it accurately depicts the movies, doesn't make it canon now does it. The point is, saying that the novels accurately depicts the movies =/ saying that the novels are canon.

So unlucky, because this point goes nowhere in proving that the novelisations are canon.

"We have what we call Canon, which is the screenplays, novelizations, and other works that are directly tied into continuity"

-- Allan Kausch, The Secrets of Star Wars: Shadows of the Empire.

This is referring to novels in general, not specifically the movie novelisations, so moot point.

So unlucky, because this point goes nowhere in proving that the novelisations are canon.

"Gospel, or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelizations. "

-- Sue Rostoni, Issue 23 of Star Wars Insider, 1994.

Refer to the point ^.

So as you can see Advent, none of those points above prove that the movie novelisations are canon, I've perfectly explained why. If you want to continue this, you're going to have to explain how, point by point, those quotes make the movie novelisations canon. Now please, providing quotes without an explanation is not how things are done here Advent, and it's quite funny coming from you, considering how you made such a big deal when I didn't elaborate on the Xanatos issue. So no, unlucky, but you didn't defeat any points, and I was quite happy to save you the humiliation of losing in a debate, but seeing as you're so against us agreeing to disagree, you're gonna have to get pwned.

Quite honestly, I've never met one more dense than you are.

Yes, you show very capable signs of being intelligent

^Contradicting yourself now? seriously...

And that belief comes from where exactly?

The novelisations contradict the highest form of canon on too many occasions, it's based on an early draft of the script. It is illogical to assume that they're canon, and seeing as there's no proof on your side....

Obviously, I could see where you're coming from if you put aside quotes from Leland Chee, Allan Kausch, our own canon policy, and Sue Rostoni they are. However, this is a type of debate where we don't leave authorities' quotes out of the issue, ergo your "belief" is quite frankly wrong.

It's comical at best that you know you're wrong, yet won't admit it. If anything, I'd just like to ask why you disregard quotes from Leland Chee? And also if you really are incapable of understanding "plain as day" things?

Those quotes prove nothing, I've already explained why.

You know? Then time to prove up.

If a line in a novel contradicts the fight scene, then that line and that line only is counted as non-canon. Leland Chee has stated that discrepancies are dealt with case by case. So, try again.

No, they aren't.

Again, anything that contradicts is dealt with case by case, anything seen or elaborated on in the movie is canon, anything that clearly didn't happen whatsoever is non-canon.

For example,

"Dooku's red blade stabbed hard into his left shoulder, and as he lurched back, Dooku retracted the blade and stabbed along its original course, digging into Obi-Wan's right thigh." (Attack of the Clones, Chp. 24)

"[...]he used his last burst of dark power to continue his spin into a blindingly fast wheel-kick that brought his heel against the point of Kenobi's chin with a crack like the report of a huge-bore slugthrower, knocking the Jedi Master back down the stairs. Sounded like he'd broken his neck." (Revenge of the Sith, Chp. 3)

The former doesn't contradict from the movies, it's canon and in a fight scene (as is majority of the fight scene in the novel of AotC). The latter, however, clearly never happened and is thus non-canon. But the point is that only that single contradiction is non-canon, not the entire scene.

And that's already been long established from my part using quotes from employees of LFL. Your side hasn't confirmed jack shit, except that you believe they are non-canon. You, who doesn't work for LFL, and has offered no proof whatsoever.

You really did lose on this point, and there is no "agree to disagree". You're simply wrong.

I do not believe the novelisation to be canon, period. But to counter this point, I'll work under the assertion that they are.

Now you clearly seem to be having difficulty applying your logic and intelligence (as I'm not going to lie, I won't deny that you're very intelligent), I can only assume you don't understand how swordfighting works.

Every action that takes place in a swordfight (every movement, every strike, every parry etc.) leads into another action. Everything that happens is dependant on what happens just before it. So when you break a chain, in other words when any aspect (can be minor as hell) of an entire fight is changed, it results in a chain reaction where everything after it is altered, resulting in a change in the eventual result.
^That is why any minor contradiction in a fightscene renders the entire fightscene invalid. So no Advent, you are wrong, and you were really asking to get proven wrong there.

It does not render my points invalid because you are:

1. Wrong.
2. Pulling shit from your ass.
3. And flinging it around like a monkey.
4. Ignoring official quotes.
5. Ignoring facts.

You can use anything that isn't contradicted from a fight scene, as things that do contradict (another example, Maul doing a back flip over the melting pit) are non-canon and are dealt with "case-by-case" to ensure that the rest of the novel is canon.

O RLY?
Face it Advent, you've been owned, badly; you've lied, misinterpreted basic concepts, read quotes and wrongly interpreted them... Concede, and you retain a bit of dignity.

Originally posted by The Planet
Are you a moron? Whether you technically called me one or not, you made it clear that you believed I was one and wanted to point it out to everyone. My response 'For the last time, I am not a fecking sock' was a perfectly valid reply to you labelling me a sock, so if you're really trying to be a smartass, you're not doing a very good job of it. If I made the assertion that you directly called me one, then yes, you could say this, but my whole point was that it was clear that you were labelling me as one, so your smartass bs here really isn't working.

I wasn't even implying. I just felt like posting a picture of a sock.

Originally posted by The Planet
Who the fvck are you to call me a kid? Please, being the number 1 dumbass on these forums (that's right, number 1, I bet even Kadesh could out debate you lol!), I suggest you be quiet.

Kid doesn't have to refer to your age. It can also be used as slang. And besides your mentality is pretty childish, so I may be correct in saying "kid" when I address you.

Oh my days, why is this schmuck still talking to me?

I wasn't even implying. I just felt like posting a picture of a sock.

1. You have called me a sock on other threads.
2. You were clearly referring to me with that picture, given the 'you fail kid'.
3. As strange as you are, I really don't think you'd just post a picture of a sock for no apparent reason.

Kid doesn't have to refer to your age. It can also be used as slang. And besides your mentality is pretty childish, so I may be correct in saying "kid" when I address you.

Did I say that? All I said was 'who the **** are you to call me a kid'. Seriously dude, this whole smartass thing really isn't working, you're not doing it properly, go back to school.

Originally posted by The Planet

This is great and all, but LC never said that the novelisations were canon (he actually kinda skirted the question, didn't directly respond), just that the parts that came from Lucas are. Now here's where your problem lies: whenever using [b]anything from the novel, you have to prove that it actually came from Lucas, otherwise it simply can't be counted.

So unlucky, because this point goes nowhere in proving that the novelisations are canon.[/B]

Are you a moron? How did he never say the novels were canon?

"Q: Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?

A: In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron continuity database, January 24, 2004.

Anything created by the author would be C-level--when asked about the novelizations of the films. That's pretty obvious. He didn't skirt around anything. He went on to further explain that anything written or said GL would be G-level. I don't see how you could possibly misconstrue the statement at all.

Originally posted by Darth Subjekt
Are you a moron? How did he never say the novels were canon?

"Q: Are novelisations of the films considered G-level or C-level material?

A: In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee, Holocron continuity database, January 24, 2004.

Anything created by the author would be C-level--when asked about the novelizations of the films. That's pretty obvious. He didn't skirt around anything. He went on to further explain that anything written or said GL would be G-level. I don't see how you could possibly misconstrue the statement at all.

Are you a moron? I didn't misconsture shit. You clearly lack the reading comprehension to understand what I said. I can see that LC stated that anything that came form Lucas that is inside the novel is canon, the only problem for you and Advent now is proving what came from Lucas.

No dumbass, he said anything created by the author is C-level canon and anything by Lucas is G-level canon. THAT"s what he said. He didn't say only the parts of the novel that were from Lucas were canon period, he explained the two different levels. We don't have to prove that shit came from Lucas, cause that's not the issue. The issue is a remedial tool, trying to argue with official statements and twisting words around to fit your pathetically weak argument.

And by the way, you hardly pwned Advent, so stop spouting that shit in other threads.

Originally posted by The Planet
No, the difference is, I actually base my assertions off logic; when a source constantly contradicts the highest form of canon, it shouldn't be considered credible.

Here's where the problem lies: going by what you call "logic", Splinters of the Mind's Eye isn't canon. It contradicts the movies on some several levels (as well as other books), but when asked in the Holocron database continuity questions thread about the overall canonicity of the book, Leland gave this answer:

"Vader using Force lightning is non-continuity. And like the films, certain parts get icky when you know that Luke and Leia are siblings. There are probably a few other bits that also are non-continuity, but as a whole it is[...]"

Now, by your logic, SotME isn't canon at all (because the novels aren't, going by your "logic"😉. Leland Chee says otherwise. So, this would give indication that any small discrepancies between the novelizations and the film are considered "N"-canon, but like SotME, as a whole it is canon.

You, on the other hand, have listed a bunch of quotes from different Lucasarts officials, but haven't provided an explanation of how they prove that the movie novelisations are canon. Why?

Most likely because Leland Chee's intial quote of "anything created by the author is C-level" was self explanatory, but now I'd surmise that it's not clear and cut due to your difficulty understand the basic language of English.

I'm guessing it's because you can't,

ORLY?

I'll explain to you, most likely condescendingly so as I can get my point across easily.

This is great and all, but LC never said that the novelisations were canon (he actually kinda skirted the question, didn't directly respond), just that the parts that came from Lucas are.

Incorrect.

As Subjekt already pointed out (and quite frankly, destroyed your point), he clearly states that whatever comes from the author is C-level. C-level, in other words, "canon as any other novel, comic, etc."

That's quite crystal clear. He didn't skirt anything, actually. He directly answered and explained that things such as, for example, the "shuura fruit" is G-level since it was exactly depicted in the film.

Moreover, he words a question regarding the Visual Dictionaries the same exact way:

"Theses books are treated no differently than any other books; anything created by the author would be C-level." (and yes, he did misspell "these"; Holocron continuity thread.)

If anything created by the author is C-level, and he states "no differently than any other books", then it would give implication to what he said regarding novels is that they are also "C" canon. The "G" canon elements are things that are clearly depicted in the movie; the rest is "C" canon.

Now here's where your problem lies: whenever using anything from the novel, you have to prove that it actually came from Lucas, otherwise it simply can't be counted.

Can we say "bullshit"? I'd surmise you can't, but of course, me and the rest of the world who isn't devoid of logic can.

Let me break this down simply. In the Holocron continuity thread, Chee states this:

"[...] the "shuura fruit" mentioned in the AOTC novel would be G because you see it in the film, although the author came up with the name."

Now, using this as my example, I'll explain how it's quite simple to deduce the novels are canon. He says that even though the name was the idea of the author, it's still "G"-level because we see it in the movie. That could not be if the novel wasn't already "C"-canon. Why? Let's take a look to what Leland Chee writes in his blog regarding continuity:

"Similarly, any "C" canon entry that makes it into the films can become "G" canon."

As you can see, since the "shuura fruit" was a "C-canon entry" (from the AotC novel), and it did make it's way into the film, it's counted as "G" canon. To reinforce, if the title of "shuura fruit" came from an Infinities, perhaps, or something "N"-canon; it wouldn't be counted as "G", going by what Chee has said.

I agree that they should be regarded as accurate depictions, but that doesn't neccesarily make them canon.

Obviously. I'd concede to that point, however, they are canon.

I can write a book based on the SW movies, I can make it so that it accurately depicts the movies, doesn't make it canon now does it.

Oh, my, no. How could you forget to add the part that you don't work for LucasFilms, Ltd. or have any ties to anything stemming from George Lucas' Star Wars and Lucas Licensing. The difference between say, Matt Stover writing a novelization and you is that he has the authority to do such, and his books come with a seal.

This is referring to novels in general, not specifically the movie novelisations, so moot point.

You do realize that the quotes mentions "radio dramas, screenplays, films" beforehand? This would give indication that it's talking about the film novelizations. Why? Simple. The radio dramas were expanded radio adaptations of the original films, the screenplays are scripts of the films, the films of course, are the films.

Do you see a pattern yet? If not, then I'm really at a loss for words. The point isn't moot because you misinterpreted the quote. Furthermore, I'd surmise that if it was referring to novels in general, it would've listed comics as well (as those are canon), but it didn't. Which gives supplementary indication.

So as you can see Advent, none of those points above prove that the movie novelisations are canon, I've perfectly explained why.

If you "perfectly explained" how they aren't canon, then a) I wouldn't be contesting them (I can concede when I'm wrong; see: Ush, Janus, etc.), and b) they wouldn't be wrong.

So no, unlucky, but you didn't defeat any points, and I was quite happy to save you the humiliation of losing in a debate, but seeing as you're so against us agreeing to disagree, you're gonna have to get pwned.

Captain Planet, puh-leaze. Humiliate me? First of all, losing in a debate over Star Wars (or even haven't shit torn apart) isn't very embarrassing; of course, not that I even lost in this one, but I've had defeats before, as hard as that is to imagine. Secondly, I haven't seen any "pwnage" served to me via your posts, and I doubt I ever will.

The novelisations contradict the highest form of canon on too many occasions, it's based on an early draft of the script.

^See above points, see below points.

It is illogical to assume that they're canon, and seeing as there's no proof on your side....

Ha. No.

There's ample proof on my side, actually. On yours, however? "They contradict the movies sometimes!", so does SotME. Yet SotME is canon overall(which demolishes your argument). The inconsistencies, as I've already relayed to you numerous times, are dealt with case-by-case:

"Q: How do you deal, *officially*, with a conflict between say, the movies and the novelizations?
A: All contradictions are dealt with case-by-case"

By doing that, it ensures that novelizations' are still counted as canon. Likewise, he states that the "case-by-case" determination is always in effect, no matter what the sources are.

I can only assume you don't understand how swordfighting works.

Wow, Captain Planet, I'm actually surprised an assumption coming from you is correct. Although, the rest aren't.

And I'll address the bit about the whole fighting scene descriptions being non-canon as soon as my damn question gets answered. I'm not going to lie either, I don't know anything about melee fighting, and regarding the novels, there's an obvious answer which I do not believe is inclusive of them being consider "N"-canon, but I'll share that later as said.

O RLY?
Face it Advent, you've been owned, badly; you've lied, misinterpreted basic concepts, read quotes and wrongly interpreted them... Concede, and you retain a bit of dignity.

YARLY!
I haven't been owned, nor even anything vaguely like it. The one thing that irks me is "read quotes and wrongly interpreted". I really find this humorous at best, considering you misunderstood simple quotes. In any case, I do not feel the need to acquiesce, and my dignity would actually be gone if I did so. Considering I'd be agreeing to an argument with many faulty claims.

Did you really think that the powers of earth, fire, wind, water, and heart combined could stop me, Captain Planet? Ha.

See...thats what you would call minor pwnage, douche bag. Being able to somewhat articulate your arguments, in no way makes you a good debater, especially when you try to argue canon, official quotes and statements, and more importantly, common sense. Who the hell are you to say you pwned anyone, or even down talk kadesh or JJ? You are not SHIT. Trust.

Originally posted by The Planet
Oh my days, why is this schmuck still talking to me?

Because I want to. If you don't like me, then put me on ignore. I doubt you will though as most people find me to be cheap entertainment.

Originally posted by The Planet
1. You have called me a sock on other threads.
2. You were clearly referring to me with that picture, given the 'you fail kid'.
3. As strange as you are, I really don't think you'd just post a picture of a sock for no apparent reason.

A) But we're talking about in this thread, not in the vs. forum as a whole.

B) Got any proof for this statement? Links? Quotes from official sources? I want GL's opinion on the matter.

C)I'm pretty strange. You'd be surprised.

Originally posted by The Planet
Did I say that? All I said was 'who the **** are you to call me a kid'. Seriously dude, this whole smartass thing really isn't working, you're not doing it properly, go back to school.

Who's trying to be a smart ass? I'm just being annoying.

The initial subject material of this thread deteriorated at light speed.

This is obviously a technological advancement which we can use as proof in the EU thread that, There WILL be a Star Wars.