The Energon Pub

OptimusN1701 wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Tremp what make a body of work canon is if the owner makes a "specific" statement that it does.....not the lack or such a statement.

No. If that were the case, then nothing in Transformers is canon because Hasbro has never released an official canon policy stating what is canon. Therefore, the opposite is true, unless the authority—Hasbro/Takara—specifically states that something that they have licensed and sanctioned, is not canon, then it is canon.

I just sent an email to Hasbro regarding this issue, and hope for an answer soon. I won't make any guarantees I'll get one though.

So by your theroy if theres no law againist killing its ok by default???????Lack of an official canon policy does not make everything canon by default.For that matter if theres no official canon policy stating what is canon by Hasbro then all this fighting you have continued to do on the Guide and how its canon has just lost its bite.That means that the Guide might not be canon.You were never any good in debate class were you........you just gave up you posion and you dont even know it..........Theres no official canon policy stating what is canon by Hasbro you just said. it.That means that the Guide is not offical.

Somebody just got served

Thank you.....I do my best

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Damolisher wrote:Sto_Vo, Tramp will change whatever he wants, just so he can be right. Let the feeble minded geek think whatever the hell he's like. He's not worth wasting our time on.

You see how even when hes dis-proven with his own words he just dubble talks his way out!!!!!!!!!I dont know what could push a man to the exstream that he always has to be right.........I thing he's trying to cover up some small aspects of his personality

Yeah, the part of his personality which screams "GOD I NEED A WOMAN! I'm 37 and still single, dammit!"

Then again, that isn't very well-covered, going a post in a topic about Unicron's heralds, which was punctuated with:

Tramp wrote:I liked the comic Armada's Airazor because they drew her to be much curvier than the toy...

I mean, seriously, 37, and he's drooling over how curvy some comic artist made a kids' toy look? Not only that, but A) It's millions of years old, and B) it's a BIRD. Talk about Broadening his stanards, damn.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:Son of the Demon and Bride of the Demon were originally meant to reside outside of main continuity, though they have more recently been tied into main continuity. They were non-continuoity, not non-canon. To my kowledge, Killing Joke was always meant as part of main continuity. Elesworlds is a specific title involving these iconic characters in stories set in time periods and settings other than their real settings. They aren't simply non-continuity, but set in truly other times and places and events which could not take place in main-line continuity.

Son of the Demon and Bride of the Demon may have been ment to be outside the mainstream universe but there's not disclaimer at the begining or ending of the books to say as much so by your theroy they are canon and in continuity by default.
And your wrong about The Killing Joke If you read the book you would know becaus they show a photo of Batwoman and Bat-mite in the Batcave.......2 character's wipe from continuity by the first crisis.Meaning that it was written to be outside continuity.

By default, they are part of the canon, not necessarily the main continuity. Continuity and canon are two different things.

Now your changing the definition of the word canon.......here is what you stated earlyer....

3 [Middle English, from Late Latin, from Latin, standard] a : an authoritative list of books accepted as Holy Scripture b : the authentic works of a writer c : a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works

Stories that are in Continuity are the "Holy Scripture" of that character or Universe of character's that the story is telling.The two words are not very different at all when it conserns what were talking about.How can the story Son Of the Demon be canon "Holy Scripture" if its outside continuity????????

Not true Sto_vo_kor. Definition nuber one, regarding holy scripture is strictly referring to The Holy Bible. That is why the words "Holy Scripture" are capitalized. that first definition has nothing to do with any other form of literature. The other two definitions refer to literature, and the thrid definition—b]c : a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works [/b]—is the key one that specifically applies her because we are discussing the sanctioned works licensed by Hasbro and Takara for the Transformers mythos. All of the material officially licensed and sanctioned by Hasbro is a part of the official TF canon. They haven't excluded anything. and without that specific exclusion, it is all canon. If it were a matter of Hasbro giving as list of specific things which were canon, or they wouldn't be, then nothing, not even the original cartoon and marvel comics woudl be canon, and I doubt anyone would agree with that. Therefore, unless Hasbro specifically excludes something they have licensed and approved, it is officially canon.

All of the following Batman stories were not canon when they were printed but some of them have since been adopted into canon.............

Batman/Phantom Stranger
Batman: War on Crime
Batman/Joker: Switch
Batman:Arkham Asylum
The Killing Joke
The Joker: Devil's
Batman: Digital
Batman: Child of Dreams
Batman: Full Circle
Batman: Book of Shadows
Batman: Batman of Arkham
Batman: Son of the Demon
Batman: Birth of the Demon
Batman: Bride of the Demon
Batman: Holy Terror
Batman: Hong Kong Hardcover
Batman: Fortunate Son

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:Son of the Demon and Bride of the Demon were originally meant to reside outside of main continuity, though they have more recently been tied into main continuity. They were non-continuoity, not non-canon. To my kowledge, Killing Joke was always meant as part of main continuity. Elesworlds is a specific title involving these iconic characters in stories set in time periods and settings other than their real settings. They aren't simply non-continuity, but set in truly other times and places and events which could not take place in main-line continuity.

Son of the Demon and Bride of the Demon may have been ment to be outside the mainstream universe but there's not disclaimer at the begining or ending of the books to say as much so by your theroy they are canon and in continuity by default.
And your wrong about The Killing Joke If you read the book you would know becaus they show a photo of Batwoman and Bat-mite in the Batcave.......2 character's wipe from continuity by the first crisis.Meaning that it was written to be outside continuity.

By default, they are part of the canon, not necessarily the main continuity. Continuity and canon are two different things.

Now your changing the definition of the word canon.......here is what you stated earlyer....

3 [Middle English, from Late Latin, from Latin, standard] a : an authoritative list of books accepted as Holy Scripture b : the authentic works of a writer c : a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works

Stories that are in Continuity are the "Holy Scripture" of that character or Universe of character's that the story is telling.The two words are not very different at all when it conserns what were talking about.How can the story Son Of the Demon be canon "Holy Scripture" if its outside continuity????????

Not true Sto_vo_kor. Definition nuber one, regarding holy scripture is strictly referring to The Holy Bible. That is why the words "Holy Scripture" are capitalized.

Uh, does it say the bible, retard? No. It says Holy Scripture, not THE Holy Scripture, you ignorant gimp. In any instance, it's ANY Holy Scripture, Bible or otherwise!

No Damolisher, HolY Scripture is the Bible. Ask your local priest or preacher what that means. It's the difference between a god, and "God". between a lord and "The Lord". "Holy Sripture" is The Holy Bible.

Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:Now your changing the definition of the word canon.......here is what you stated earlyer....

3 [Middle English, from Late Latin, from Latin, standard] a : an authoritative list of books accepted as Holy Scripture b : the authentic works of a writer c : a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works

Stories that are in Continuity are the "Holy Scripture" of that character or Universe of character's that the story is telling.The two words are not very different at all when it conserns what were talking about.How can the story Son Of the Demon be canon "Holy Scripture" if its outside continuity????????

Not true Sto_vo_kor. Definition nuber one, regarding holy scripture is strictly referring to The Holy Bible. That is why the words "Holy Scripture" are capitalized. that first definition has nothing to do with any other form of literature. The other two definitions refer to literature, and the thrid definition—b]c : a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works [/b]—is the key one that specifically applies her because we are discussing the sanctioned works licensed by Hasbro and Takara for the Transformers mythos. All of the material officially licensed and sanctioned by Hasbro is a part of the official TF canon. They haven't excluded anything. and without that specific exclusion, it is all canon. If it were a matter of Hasbro giving as list of specific things which were canon, or they wouldn't be, then nothing, not even the original cartoon and marvel comics woudl be canon, and I doubt anyone would agree with that. Therefore, unless Hasbro specifically excludes something they have licensed and approved, it is officially canon.

How can a defibition of a word only petain to the Bible?????Even the Bible has had many retcon done to it over the years.....many book have been removed or re-written in the bible so why would any word pretain only to that book???The Bible is a work of literature just like any other book.

Tramp wrote:No Damolisher, HolY Scripture is the Bible. Ask your local priest or preacher what that means. It's the difference between a god, and "God". between a lord and "The Lord". "Holy Sripture" is The Holy Bible.

Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

Wrong on both.......Son of the Demon was not excluded from canon it was never ment to be part of their canon because batman Kills in this story.......offical canon Batman never kills......and they only took eliments of SOTD into canon recently not the whole story.If you had read them you would know why.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:No Damolisher, HolY Scripture is the Bible. Ask your local priest or preacher what that means. It's the difference between a god, and "God". between a lord and "The Lord". "Holy Sripture" is The Holy Bible.

Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

Wrong on both.......Son of the Demon was not excluded from canon it was never ment to be part of their canon because batman Kills in this story.......offical canon Batman never kills......and they only took eliments of SOTD into canon recently not the whole story.If you had read them you would know why.

My point is that DC had specifically excluded those books and have gone on record saying so. That is not the case with the Transformers. They have not specifically excluded the Ultimate Guide, not anything else from official TF canon, and untill they do so, it is all canon. This includes the retcons.

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:No Damolisher, HolY Scripture is the Bible. Ask your local priest or preacher what that means. It's the difference between a god, and "God". between a lord and "The Lord". "Holy Sripture" is The Holy Bible.

Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

Wrong on both.......Son of the Demon was not excluded from canon it was never ment to be part of their canon because batman Kills in this story.......offical canon Batman never kills......and they only took eliments of SOTD into canon recently not the whole story.If you had read them you would know why.

My point is that DC had specifically excluded those books and have gone on record saying so. That is not the case with the Transformers. They have not specifically excluded the Ultimate Guide, not anything else from official TF canon, and untill they do so, it is all canon. This includes the retcons.

You can not excluded a book or story that was never included in the first place.

Tramp wrote:
Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

I thought you said that canon only ment that the story be officaly produce by it publisher or owner.....it seems your useing the word as if it ment continuity and you said that these two words ment different things??????

And you still havent told me how a word only pretains to the bible.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:No Damolisher, HolY Scripture is the Bible. Ask your local priest or preacher what that means. It's the difference between a god, and "God". between a lord and "The Lord". "Holy Sripture" is The Holy Bible.

Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

Wrong on both.......Son of the Demon was not excluded from canon it was never ment to be part of their canon because batman Kills in this story.......offical canon Batman never kills......and they only took eliments of SOTD into canon recently not the whole story.If you had read them you would know why.

My point is that DC had specifically excluded those books and have gone on record saying so. That is not the case with the Transformers. They have not specifically excluded the Ultimate Guide, not anything else from official TF canon, and untill they do so, it is all canon. This includes the retcons.

You can not excluded a book or story that was never included in the first place.

Sto_vo_kor, that is what "Exclude" means—to deliberately not include. DC had specifically and intentionally not included those books from their canon. That is excluding them.

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:No Damolisher, HolY Scripture is the Bible. Ask your local priest or preacher what that means. It's the difference between a god, and "God". between a lord and "The Lord". "Holy Sripture" is The Holy Bible.

Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

Wrong on both.......Son of the Demon was not excluded from canon it was never ment to be part of their canon because batman Kills in this story.......offical canon Batman never kills......and they only took eliments of SOTD into canon recently not the whole story.If you had read them you would know why.

My point is that DC had specifically excluded those books and have gone on record saying so. That is not the case with the Transformers. They have not specifically excluded the Ultimate Guide, not anything else from official TF canon, and untill they do so, it is all canon. This includes the retcons.

You can not excluded a book or story that was never included in the first place.

Sto_vo_kor, that is what "Exclude" means—to deliberately not include. DC had specifically and intentionally not included those books from their canon. That is excluding them.

I misunderstood what you were trying to say......I thought you were saying that they removed it from their canon.For me I only use the word "Exclude" when it was originaly ment that it be included......but I see you are useing the word canon as if it had the same meaning as continuity I thought you said that they were different????????

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:
Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

I thought you said that canon only ment that the story be officaly produce by it publisher or owner.....it seems your useing the word as if it ment continuity and you said that these two words ment different things??????

And you still havent told me how a word only pretains to the bible.

Canon refers to that which is sanctioned and accepted by the Authority who owns the property. DC specifically excluded Son of the Demon from their canon.They did not accept it into canon until just recently. They have the authority to make that determination, and have gone on public record stating such.

As for how a word can specifically refer to the Holy Bible, Here is the Definition of Holy Scripture (Scripture): The sacred writings of the Old and New Testaments or both together. A short passage from the Bible text. Also, under the section in the dictionary regarding grammerical manual of style, it says about rleigeous terms,

Words denoting the Diety, except who, whose, and whom; names for the Bible and other sacred writings and their parts; and names of confessions of faith, and of religeous bodies and their adherents and words specifically denoting Satan are all capitalized.

Therefore, the definition given under "canon" referring to Holy Scripture, is strictly referring to the Holy Bible.

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:
Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

I thought you said that canon only ment that the story be officaly produce by it publisher or owner.....it seems your useing the word as if it ment continuity and you said that these two words ment different things??????

And you still havent told me how a word only pretains to the bible.

Canon refers to that which is sanctioned and accepted by the Authority who owns the property. DC specifically excluded Son of the Demon from their canon.They did not accept it into canon until just recently. They have the authority to make that determination, and have gone on public record stating such.

As for how a word can specifically refer to the Holy Bible, Here is the Definition of Holy Scripture (Scripture): The sacred writings of the Old and New Testaments or both together. A short passage from the Bible text. Also, under the section in the dictionary regarding grammerical manual of style, it says about rleigeous terms,

Words denoting the Diety, except who, whose, and whom; names for the Bible and other sacred writings and their parts; and names of confessions of faith, and of religeous bodies and their adherents and words specifically denoting Satan are all capitalized.

Therefore, the definition given under "canon" referring to Holy Scripture, is strictly referring to]the Holy Bible.

I still dont see how a definition of a word can be strictly referring to only one topic but since I'm not a litary scholar I wont debate it any further.
As for Batman SOTD they only took parts of that story and added it to their canon much like Beast Wars took parts of G1 Marvel stories and added them to the BW's pre-history.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
I still dont see how a definition of a word can be strictly referring to only one topic but since I'm not a litary scholar I wont debate it any further.
As for Batman SOTD they only took parts of that story and added it to their canon much like Beast Wars took parts of G1 Marvel stories and added them to the BW's pre-history.

Like I said, ask your priest, Reverand, English teacher, or College Professor. As for Son of the Demon, the fact remains that DC had specifically excluded it from their canon. They didn't remove it, they excluded it. which is something all together. Hasbro has not specifically excluded anything they have licensed to any of our knowledge. Thus, everything they and Takara has licensed, approved and sanctioned is officially canon. Whether we as idivuduals choose to incorporate any of those materials into our own personal "canons" is another matter and purely subjective. But to say that an offically licensed and sanctioned source is not officially canon, is blantanly false. We as fans do not have that authority. Therefore, unless Hasbro specifically states that a given work is non-canon, officially it is canon and cannot be discounted as a reliable source of evidence and information in any discussion or debate where canon sources are cited as evidence.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:
Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

I thought you said that canon only ment that the story be officaly produce by it publisher or owner.....it seems your useing the word as if it ment continuity and you said that these two words ment different things??????

And you still havent told me how a word only pretains to the bible.

Canon refers to that which is sanctioned and accepted by the Authority who owns the property. DC specifically excluded Son of the Demon from their canon.They did not accept it into canon until just recently. They have the authority to make that determination, and have gone on public record stating such.

As for how a word can specifically refer to the Holy Bible, Here is the Definition of Holy Scripture (Scripture): The sacred writings of the Old and New Testaments or both together. A short passage from the Bible text. Also, under the section in the dictionary regarding grammerical manual of style, it says about rleigeous terms,

Words denoting the Diety, except who, whose, and whom; names for the Bible and other sacred writings and their parts; and names of confessions of faith, and of religeous bodies and their adherents and words specifically denoting Satan are all capitalized.

Therefore, the definition given under "canon" referring to Holy Scripture, is strictly referring to]the Holy Bible.

I still dont see how a definition of a word can be strictly referring to only one topic but since I'm not a litary scholar I wont debate it any further.
As for Batman SOTD they only took parts of that story and added it to their canon much like Beast Wars took parts of G1 Marvel stories and added them to the BW's pre-history.

Now you know Sto_ that hes gonna say youre wrong there to b/c BW was a direct continuation of the G1 series only b/c Hasbro retconned Primus in there. and therefore has nothing to do w/ Marvels stories eventhough they had primus as a god in there already.

Oh whatever would we do if Tramp were not here to bathe us in the bright white light of the knowledge of canon? ( which will later be retconned into blue light by Hasbro)

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
I still dont see how a definition of a word can be strictly referring to only one topic but since I'm not a litary scholar I wont debate it any further.
As for Batman SOTD they only took parts of that story and added it to their canon much like Beast Wars took parts of G1 Marvel stories and added them to the BW's pre-history.

Like I said, ask your priest, Reverand, English teacher, or College Professor. As for Son of the Demon, the fact remains that DC had specifically excluded it from their canon. They didn't remove it, they excluded it. which is something all together. Hasbro has not specifically excluded anything they have licensed to any of our knowledge. Thus, everything they and Takara has licensed, approved and sanctioned is officially canon. Whether we as idivuduals choose to incorporate any of those materials into our own personal "canons" is another matter and purely subjective. But to say that an offically licensed and sanctioned source is not officially canon, is blantanly false. We as fans do not have that authority. Therefore, unless Hasbro specifically states that a given work is non-canon, officially it is canon and cannot be discounted as a reliable source of evidence and information in any discussion or debate where canon sources are cited as evidence.

I dont have a Priest or a Reverand and I havent been to school in almost 16 years and I'm not going back just to find this out.Now some of these retcons do remove some aspects od what was canon before, how do you explaine that?????

Actually, I never said that they didn't take anything from the Marvel comics. They took Primus and the name of the Autobots' ship, the Ark, from Marvel, but that's about it. There is some speculation as to whether the Vok are the evolved form of the Swarm, but nothing confirmed. The continuity itself is a direct continuation of the G1 cartoon continuity. This has been stated by Bob Forward and others in authority.

OptimusN1701 wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:
Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

I thought you said that canon only ment that the story be officaly produce by it publisher or owner.....it seems your useing the word as if it ment continuity and you said that these two words ment different things??????

And you still havent told me how a word only pretains to the bible.

Canon refers to that which is sanctioned and accepted by the Authority who owns the property. DC specifically excluded Son of the Demon from their canon.They did not accept it into canon until just recently. They have the authority to make that determination, and have gone on public record stating such.

As for how a word can specifically refer to the Holy Bible, Here is the Definition of Holy Scripture (Scripture): The sacred writings of the Old and New Testaments or both together. A short passage from the Bible text. Also, under the section in the dictionary regarding grammerical manual of style, it says about rleigeous terms,

Words denoting the Diety, except who, whose, and whom; names for the Bible and other sacred writings and their parts; and names of confessions of faith, and of religeous bodies and their adherents and words specifically denoting Satan are all capitalized.

Therefore, the definition given under "canon" referring to Holy Scripture, is strictly referring to]the Holy Bible.

I still dont see how a definition of a word can be strictly referring to only one topic but since I'm not a litary scholar I wont debate it any further.
As for Batman SOTD they only took parts of that story and added it to their canon much like Beast Wars took parts of G1 Marvel stories and added them to the BW's pre-history.

Now you know Sto_ that hes gonna say youre wrong there to b/c BW was a direct continuation of the G1 series only b/c Hasbro retconned Primus in there. and therefore has nothing to do w/ Marvels stories eventhough they had primus as a god in there already.

Oh whatever would we do if Tramp were not here to bathe us in the bright white light of the knowledge of canon? ( which will later be retconned into blue light by Hasbro)

I was hopping for a shade of minty green.

Tramp wrote:Actually, I never said that they didn't take anything from the Marvel comics. They took Primus and the name of the Autobots' ship, the Ark, from Marvel, but that's about it. There is some speculation as to whether the Vok are the evolved form of the Swarm, but nothing confirmed. The continuity itself is a direct continuation of the G1 cartoon continuity. This has been stated by Bob Forward and others in authority.

Bob Forward also stated that it was his intention to bring in more eliments from the Marvel U.K.and U.S. stories if the show's 2nd season but time and buget didnt allow for it and by the 3rd season they were told that it would be its last so he never followed up on it beyond the Primus statments.The whole Ravage talking thing was a nod to the comics and that came from Bob Forward's mouth.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

OptimusN1701 wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:
Also, as for Sone of the Demon and Bride of the Demon, DC has gone on record saying that they had excluded those stories from their canon. I(t was only recently that they lifted that exclusion.

I thought you said that canon only ment that the story be officaly produce by it publisher or owner.....it seems your useing the word as if it ment continuity and you said that these two words ment different things??????

And you still havent told me how a word only pretains to the bible.

Canon refers to that which is sanctioned and accepted by the Authority who owns the property. DC specifically excluded Son of the Demon from their canon.They did not accept it into canon until just recently. They have the authority to make that determination, and have gone on public record stating such.

As for how a word can specifically refer to the Holy Bible, Here is the Definition of Holy Scripture (Scripture): The sacred writings of the Old and New Testaments or both together. A short passage from the Bible text. Also, under the section in the dictionary regarding grammerical manual of style, it says about rleigeous terms,

Words denoting the Diety, except who, whose, and whom; names for the Bible and other sacred writings and their parts; and names of confessions of faith, and of religeous bodies and their adherents and words specifically denoting Satan are all capitalized.

Therefore, the definition given under "canon" referring to Holy Scripture, is strictly referring to]the Holy Bible.

I still dont see how a definition of a word can be strictly referring to only one topic but since I'm not a litary scholar I wont debate it any further.
As for Batman SOTD they only took parts of that story and added it to their canon much like Beast Wars took parts of G1 Marvel stories and added them to the BW's pre-history.

Now you know Sto_ that hes gonna say youre wrong there to b/c BW was a direct continuation of the G1 series only b/c Hasbro retconned Primus in there. and therefore has nothing to do w/ Marvels stories eventhough they had primus as a god in there already.

Oh whatever would we do if Tramp were not here to bathe us in the bright white light of the knowledge of canon? ( which will later be retconned into blue light by Hasbro)

I was hopping for a shade of minty green.

Then they will just retcon that retcon out in about 20 years so that it will be minty green.

HOORAY FOR RETCONNING!!! *cough*sarcasm*cough*

Hmm, that has Gargoyles in an interesting state.
Disney had the third season made, but it isn't considered canon by the mastermind behind Gargoyles and the vast majority of fans. Disney now liscenced a comic written by the mastermind behind Gargoyles which works on the premise that the third season isn't canon and never happened.
Since the Gargoyles canon doesn't know a multiverse a bunch of other officially liscenced products as non-canon, too.

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:

Tramp wrote:

sto_vo_kor_2000 wrote:
I still dont see how a definition of a word can be strictly referring to only one topic but since I'm not a litary scholar I wont debate it any further.
As for Batman SOTD they only took parts of that story and added it to their canon much like Beast Wars took parts of G1 Marvel stories and added them to the BW's pre-history.

Like I said, ask your priest, Reverand, English teacher, or College Professor. As for Son of the Demon, the fact remains that DC had specifically excluded it from their canon. They didn't remove it, they excluded it. which is something all together. Hasbro has not specifically excluded anything they have licensed to any of our knowledge. Thus, everything they and Takara has licensed, approved and sanctioned is officially canon. Whether we as idivuduals choose to incorporate any of those materials into our own personal "canons" is another matter and purely subjective. But to say that an offically licensed and sanctioned source is not officially canon, is blantanly false. We as fans do not have that authority. Therefore, unless Hasbro specifically states that a given work is non-canon, officially it is canon and cannot be discounted as a reliable source of evidence and information in any discussion or debate where canon sources are cited as evidence.

I dont have a Priest or a Reverand and I havent been to school in almost 16 years and I'm not going back just to find this out.Now some of these retcons do remove some aspects od what was canon before, how do you explaine that?????

They don't remove them entirely, but they do change them, which happens in fiction. Retconning Primus as the one true creator of the Transformers doesn't remove the Quintessan incvolvement in their development, nor remove Five Faces of Darkness from canon. It simply changes the interpretation of those past events and how they really played out in ancient Cybertronian history. Having Unicron actually created by The One along with Primus, and being a dark god who travels from reality to reality, does not completely eliminate the Primacron origin story for Unicron or Call of the Primitives from canon. It simply changes the interpretation of the events told to the characters. Primacron could very well have built the "Unicron" body, and the real Unicron, then posessed it. On the other hand, the story itself told to the Dinobots by Primacron could also be chalked up to the fanciful delusions of the storyteller himself. Remember, it is being told to the characters by another individual. Primacron himself could have fabricated the whole story that he had created Unicron. Simply put, the retcon esteblishing Primus and Unicron as opposed gods spanning the multiverse does not remove any stories from canon, it simply changes the meanings and interpretations of specific facts within them. To give you an example from Star Wars. Boboa Fett has had several conflicting origin stories given over the years from being Jaster Mereel, a former Jounreyman Protector of the planet Concord Dawn, to being a former Imperial Stormtrooper. All of these stories are canon. Yet, as of AotC, we now know his true origin is that he is an unaltered clone, son of Jango Fett. The retcon given to reconsile this is that his other stories are misinformation and rumor which adds to Fett's mystery. Jaster Mereel was the man who raised Jango, Bob used that identity for a time. All of his conflicting "origin" stories add to his mystery, though we, the audience, now know his true origins.
Another example is the age of the Old Republic. In A New Hope Obi-Wan tells Luke that, "for a thousand generations, the Jedi Knights were guardians of peace and Justice in the Old Republic". Yet, in Attack fo the Clones Palpatine states that the Republic has stood for only 1000 years. HEre we have a conflict between two movies. Which is the true age of the Old Republic? 1000 generations (25000 years) or only 1000 years? That answer is both. According to The New Essential Chronology, the Old Republic went through a reformation 1000 years before the events in the prequels after the thousand year war versus the Sith Brotherhood of Darkness. This retcon reconciled two conflictinfg statements from two G-level canon (the highest level canon in SW) sources.

Sarri wrote:Hmm, that has Gargoyles in an interesting state.
Disney had the third season made, but it isn't considered canon by the mastermind behind Gargoyles and the vast majority of fans. Disney now liscenced a comic written by the mastermind behind Gargoyles which works on the premise that the third season isn't canon and never happened.
Since the Gargoyles canon doesn't know a multiverse a bunch of other officially liscenced products as non-canon, too.

The key factor there is that this third season was not sanctioned by the creator, and, to my knowedge, was never released either. The fact that the creator of the series does not acknowledge the "third Season" is what makes it non-canon. He is the "authority". He determines canon for Gargoyles. IF he does not acknowledge that "third season" that third season is non-canon. It's that simple.