Anywho, the main point is starwars.com has no authority to actually comment on this one way or another, which gets us into the question: who or what has the authority to actually create Canon?
Frankly, not much / many.
Canon is defined by the Story Group as content that is absolute, as in future works cannot contradict said work because we know this work absolutely happened. Interestingly, elements of the films themselves aren't even Canon. The dialogue presented in a Canon novel is just as legitimate as that in the film, making neither truly Canon, since neither is absolute. The Story Group describes differences within works as "differences within the medium." What Canon is, then, is mainly core story points and ideas.
Which gets us into who are the arbiters of Canon? The Story Group. The Story Group has the authority to decide what is Canon and what is not Canon. Further, their job is to oversee Canon and make sure everything that is Canon is consistent and beholden to other Canon works. Now, on the subject of starwars.com, the Story Group has stated that they don't work on the databanks. In fact, when questioned on whether or not the Databanks would change in light of a new work, the Story Group responded by asking the starwars.com team since they don't handle that matter.
This makes sense: the starwars.com isn't inventing new Canon. As outlined, that's incredibly difficult for anyone to do, and by all accounts it seems the Story Group doesn't even monitor their actions. Which is shame, because there are tons of errors, such as it listing Rebels chronologically after Return of the Jedi on Anakin's biography. What they are doing is summarizing preexisting events, not creating new ones. Thus, the starwars.com has no authority to create a new development such as that Sidious was toying with Maul in a lightsaber fight. That is outside their jurisdiction. All they can do - all they are suppose to do - is to summarize events. To create a new Canon event would be a big deal.
And then let's bring up Absolutely Everything You Need to Know. Within the book, which was Story Group monitored and sanctioned, it has Darth Maul as a greater lightsaber combatant than Dooku. Even then, it's not Canon, since the Story Group has said they wish to avoid in practically all absolutes, but the point is that such a statement holds infinite more Canonical weight than a starwars.com mention stating that Sidious may or have may not toyed with Darth Maul.
Now, what would you need to prove Sidious did toy with Maul?
First, something not vague. You'd need an explicit statement that Sidious toyed with Maul for the entire lightsaber fight.
Second, you'd need something Story Group monitored, approved, and published by Disney.
Finally, you'd need to contact the Story Group for them to confirm this is indeed Canon, meaning it is beholden to all future writers describing the fight.
You don't have any of those. Thus, using this one quote as the debate-ender is pretty... baseless.
