Canon vs. Fanon & The Wiki...

[Nathan Brazil]

OK, now that I sloughed thru ~100 replies and my diabetes is spiking.

:nonono:Get Real and stop whining:rant:
(annoying large lettering intended)
Grr...You all made me think dammit....:nonono:

I now speak heresy
The spirit of the Third Imperium may live on in history, but the Third imperium is history by 1900. Deal with it.

T5.09 is canon?
Is it the latest source?
Was it de-canonized?
Since the timeline has been enumerated (Rebellion, Virus, TNE and 1248 happenend, even if crappy and inconsistent) on pg 17 and the current year is 1900, then most articles of historical nature must written in past tense:
The Third Imperium is - incorrect form
The Third Imperium was - correct form
Don't like events past past 1115? Fine don't write about them, someone will write the later events (like me), but write what you write in past tense.

T5SS (via travellermap?) is canon, yes?
Is it the latest source?
Was it de-canonized?
If that is the case, then most derived data SHOULD be regenerated from that source.
I stopped making contributions because my demographics were derived directly from travellermap data and my numbers kept getting erased. I am not concerned so much about which rule system is used. WTN, Importance, RUs, who cares? I can run data thru my database queries. I am concerned about what source is the correct source for a given year.

The ATU
All articles where there is overlap should either be listed as two articles
Duke of Sol
Duke of Sol (ATU)
or list the ATU difference information at the bottom the single article.

 

[mike wightman]

MgT is still producing stuff for pre-FFW Imperial setting - should their authors be writing in past tense?

T5 as yet has no setting, should it be written in future tense?

 

[Condottiere]

Not everyone agreed with the direction the Third Imperium setting took.

So Mongoose looks like ignoring their Extended Universe.

 

[tjoneslo]

I now speak heresy
The spirit of the Third Imperium may live on in history, but the Third imperium is history by 1900. Deal with it.

There were several lengthy discussions about this topic when the Wiki was first founded, and continues to this day. The decision was to write the wiki from the view-point of most of the material (canon and not), the golden era. A time frame of approximately 1105 to 1116. We've tried various formatting tricks (headers of different sizes and formats, Sliding hide boxes, sub-pages with links) to incorporate the materials from other times. But have not come up with a format everyone likes.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

Hi Nathan,

Good to hear from you. Thank you for sharing your take on things.

OK, now that I sloughed thru ~100 replies and my diabetes is spiking.

:nonono:Get Real and stop whining:rant:
(annoying large lettering intended)
Grr...You all made me think dammit....:nonono:

I am also a person with a diabetes diagnosis and I now manage it very successfully and have a fit, athletic body through positive diet, exercise, and others factors. Please contact me anytime and maybe I have some advice that can help you.

And, to be honest, I don't look at this discussion, even the less productive or positive parts of it, as a bad thing. It gets the conversation started and has helped focus me on making the wiki a better resource and tool for the community. That's a net positive in my book.

Since this discussion started, the wiki team has improved the citations, and is working towards other significant improvements. And regardless of those developments, the wiki now has upwards of twenty sectors now fully recorded (all worlds entered) and available.

That's 11,227 systems and worlds with entries when I checked earlier today. I, and others, have worked hard to make that happen. Very cool progress. It's coming together.

T5SS (via travellermap?) is canon, yes?
Is it the latest source?
Was it de-canonized?
If that is the case, then most derived data SHOULD be regenerated from that source.
I stopped making contributions because my demographics were derived directly from travellermap data and my numbers kept getting erased. I am not concerned so much about which rule system is used. WTN, Importance, RUs, who cares? I can run data thru my database queries. I am concerned about what source is the correct source for a given year.

My goals for the wiki are very simple:

• Build out a very useful and comprehensive resource for as much of the greater Traveller community as possible. This includes authors like Marc, publishers like Mongoose, future film makers, game referees, game players, and even fans of the novels.
• Cooperate and collaborate with all Trav RPG Wiki adminsitrators, editors, and anyone else there interested in the project.
• Make it happen through hard work and dedication. Inspire others. Invite them to join the project. Keep at it and don't be disheartened or lose focus.
• Learn from my mistakes and gaps of knowledge and correct them, mitigate them, modify them to be as useful as possible for as many people as possible.

Canon is only really important to me as a function of what Marc's policies and guidelines are. The rest is very subjective and dependent on an individual referee's desires. I fully respect that. And I am working to make the wiki canon-complaint how Marc wants it to be. Rome wasn't built in a day, but it is coming together.

My understanding of the wiki's time focus is that it is focused on 1116, the focal point for divergence between the OTU Marc-verse, the ATU or IMTU "Lorenverse", the prehistory of the sometimes un-liked OTU "New Era", and the rest of it. I write from that vantage point while trying to preserve data and viability for all other periods and interests, a somewhat impossible task. Yet, I, and others, try.

The amazing Traveler Map is canon, but it is not fixed canon. It is constantly being modified as Marc tinkers with his universe. Don used to play with it too. RIP. This makes it hard to chronicle or record since the actual "facts" are not fixed.

Right now, I am working with Josh, Thomas, and others to create greater interoperability between the Trav Map and the Trav RPG Wiki. It's happening day by day. And ultimately that's what I want, to see Traveller become a well-known and viable sci-fi setting and property again. In my view, it is struggling at a low level now and I want to see it become big. I want T5 to be an even greater success than it is now.

Positive vibes to the greater Traveller community no matter what their opinions may be.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.

 

[Nathan Brazil]

There were several lengthy discussions about this topic when the Wiki was first founded, and continues to this day. The decision was to write the wiki from the view-point of most of the material (canon and not), the golden era. A time frame of approximately 1105 to 1116. We've tried various formatting tricks (headers of different sizes and formats, Sliding hide boxes, sub-pages with links) to incorporate the materials from other times. But have not come up with a format everyone likes.

Very well. Going in that vein, how are future articles to be written and "crossover" articles to be written?

Fully Future Articles?
The Regina Republic was - incorrect form
The Regina Republic will be - correct form

Crossover?
Duke Craig Anton Horvath was born in 1063. He died in 1154. - incorrect form
Duke Craig Anton Horvath was born in 1063. He will die in 1154. - correct form

My concern is because of all the tense mixing for articles that cross this 1116 boundary. Like articles that must explain Rebellion. Like articles that explain the origin of Virus. And so on. I am not the most articulate or exacting writer, but even I can tell bad writing when I see it.

 

[Nathan Brazil]

MgT is still producing stuff for pre-FFW Imperial setting - should their authors be writing in past tense?

T5 as yet has no setting, should it be written in future tense?

Mike, you are mixing elements together that do not need to be.

I know that the wiki is used by real life writers to generate new gaming material, but I am simply talking about the wiki. Even the THICKEST writers who can actually get submissions in for game material understand past, present and future tense. I am not a professional writer, and I understand the differences. What is the problem here?

I look at the current Wikipedia as a guide to writing style, so...
For the wiki, the answer is yes, almost every article with history in it should be in past tense.
...Unless someone gets around to writing stuff for Galaxiad 1900 itself in which case those Galaxiad articles are present tense.
And when we get around to entering in that new gaming supplement's details it will be converted to past tense. What is the problem?

Perhaps even stick something on the main page of the wiki to get it done like:

On historical articles and dating:
The current year is 1900. This wiki focuses on events that happened in Charted Space up to the year 1248. For an explanation on the years between 1248 and 1900, see Galaxiad

 

[tjoneslo]

My concern is because of all the tense mixing for articles that cross this 1116 boundary. Like articles that must explain Rebellion. Like articles that explain the origin of Virus. And so on. I am not the most articulate or exacting writer, but even I can tell bad writing when I see it.

This was the point we all disagreed upon. Picking a single point to write the articles from was pretty obvious. How to write the future tense and spoilers of the rebellion and the Lorenverse was the thing we never figured out.

The counter argument was from a player perspective you want the library data for the current time. The future (I.e. Time traveler spoilers) had not happened yet. And you didn't want to see them.

The sort of plan came out to have separate milieus each written as the present. Milieu 1116 is the main one, with New era (milieu 1200) and milieu 0 being the other primary ones. But this was never more than a pie in the sky idea.

 

[Timerover51]

Do I understand from this that the setting of T5 is well into the future of circa 1100? Does an Imperium still exist, and if so, what does it consist of? Looking at the map in T5 on pages 393-394, it looks a lot like the map from Supplement 8: Library Data A-M.

 

[aramis]

Do I understand from this that the setting of T5 is well into the future of circa 1100? Does an Imperium still exist, and if so, what does it consist of? Looking at the map in T5 on pages 393-394, it looks a lot like the map from Supplement 8: Library Data A-M.

The working drafts Marc's been putting to the various focus groups are M1900... The maps look a lot alike, but the empires aren't the same, and quite honestly, some things are going to be QUITE different because of them. But it still will have worlds, ships, and travel, and ethical dilemmas. Just like CT did. And MT, and TNE, and T4.

Then again, Britain 700 years ago had similar borders to now. And so did France and Spain, and the Swiss. And Japan. But those haven't stayed the same in the interim; they have simply wound up by historical and geopolitical happenstance to line up.

 

[Timerover51]

The working drafts Marc's been putting to the various focus groups are M1900... The maps look a lot alike, but the empires aren't the same, and quite honestly, some things are going to be QUITE different because of them. But it still will have worlds, ships, and travel, and ethical dilemmas. Just like CT did. And MT, and TNE, and T4.

Then again, Britain 700 years ago had similar borders to now. And so did France and Spain, and the Swiss. And Japan. But those haven't stayed the same in the interim; they have simply wound up by historical and geopolitical happenstance to line up.

Seven hundred years ago was prior to the Hundred Years War, and parts of France still were controlled by England. The Scots had just beaten up on Edward the Second at Bannockburn, and were independent, and busily raiding the North Marches of England.

The Swiss were not really around yet at all in the sense of an independent country, as the Battle of Mortgarten had just occurred, with the three Forest Cantons gaining their independence from the Holy Roman Empire. Burgundy was still an independent power, and controlled what is now the Netherlands and Belgium.

As for Spain, a fair chunk of that was still controlled by the Moors, while Italy was a total and complete mess. The Ottomans were busily expanding in the Balkans, aside from some attempts against Persia, and the Byzantines were still around to an extent.

A map of Europe in 1300 would not at all resemble a map of the Europe of today. Denmark still controlled Norway and Sweden, and nominally Iceland. while the Greenland Norse settlements were hanging on by a thread. Sicily and Naples were independent kingdoms, while the Russians were still getting their act together.

In Asia, the Mongol Empire was still around, and Kublai Khan had just died. The Japanese had just avoided two Mongol invasions.

The, of course, North and South America were pretty much on their own, and clearly did not resemble the present day in the least.

Also, reconcile this with the fact that the 1981 Edition of Traveller is still for sale, as in Starter Traveller and The Traveller Book, along with collections of the Journal of the Traveller's Aid Society. There is a massive disconnect here.

 

[McPerth]

As for Spain, a fair chunk of that was still controlled by the Moors...

Just as a remark here; Spain as such did not exist by then, the Christian part of the penninsula being confomed by the kingdoms of Castilla y Leon (center/northwest), Corona d'Aragó (east), Portugal (west) and the Kingdom of Navarra (north), while several Moor Caliphates dominated the south (jointly known as Al-Andalus).

Of course, this only reinforces your point in what concerns Spain...

 

[Timerover51]

Just as a remark here; Spain as such did not exist by then, the Christian part of the penninsula being confomed by the kingdoms of Castilla y Leon (center/northwest), Corona d'Aragó (east), Portugal (west) and the Kingdom of Navarra (north), while several Moor Caliphates dominated the south (jointly known as Al-Andalus).

Of course, this only reinforces your point in what concerns Spain...

McPerth, I did not want to get into all of the gritty details, but thank you so much for pointing them out.

 

[Meteoric Assault]

McPerth, I did not want to get into all of the gritty details, but thank you so much for pointing them out.

Indulge him a bit... he was talking about his homeland...

 

[Nathan Brazil]

The counter argument was from a player perspective you want the library data for the current time. The future (I.e. Time traveler spoilers) had not happened yet. And you didn't want to see them.

I understand that it is feeling but I don't think it holds water with parellels such as:

• The BattleTech universe with their sarna dot net website where one finds out the Clan thing was pretty much all for naught, the timeline progresses, and still, people play and write stuff in their own sandbox eras of the past
• The Star Wars expanded universe beyond the movies (albiet somewhat now invalidated)having dealt with future events beyond the (then) six movies and such

I think that people interested can handle spoilers. Unless you are thinking that Traveller fans are SO intolerant of spoilers
Besides a lot of things can happen in ~700 years after 1248 when Galaxiad finally is written about.

My "feeling" or opinion on the matter is that it is you are only prolonging the inevitable to placate an audience segment.

 

[nobby-w]

It's worth thinking about what you want the Traveller Wiki to be.

• Do you want it to be a reference site as to what is Canon? I don't think it needs to do this, as a prospective publisher can get the majority of material that is actually considered Canon on the CD-ROMS from FFE. I also think you might be stretching the concept of Fair Use by putting up a comprehensive OTU reference on the Wiki. Remember, Canon is for publishers. It's not for angels-dancing-on-the-head-of-a-pin arguments in forums.
  I'd also argue that posting on here is likely to get you a far better view of what is or isn't Canon if you need clarification after reading the material. Cunningham's law is a marvellous thing if you know how to use it correctly.
  
• Do you want it to be a site where fan-made material can be put up? I'm given to the impression that this is what it was originally designed for.

In other words, it would be worth understanding what folks actually use the Traveller Wiki for and optimise it for that. I would be willing to bet that publishers looking up canon to avoid clashes represents a vanishingly small proportion of its actual user base.

 

[Nathan Brazil]

• Do you want it to be a reference site as to what is Canon? I don't think it needs to do this, as a prospective publisher can get the majority of material that is actually considered Canon on the CD-ROMS from FFE. I also think you might be stretching the concept of Fair Use by putting up a comprehensive OTU reference on the Wiki. Remember, Canon is for publishers. It's not for angels-dancing-on-the-head-of-a-pin arguments in forums.
  I'd also argue that posting on here is likely to get you a far better view of what is or isn't Canon if you need clarification after reading the material. Cunningham's law is a marvellous thing if you know how to use it correctly.

Why yes I would like that. On that basis, the TNE 1 and TNE 2 CD ROMS when you click to get the descriptions, the resultant PDF indicates that TNE 1 is "Essential Canon" and TNE-2 is "Extended Canon".
Hyperbole? If not, should they not be included?

 

[Nathan Brazil]

• Do you want it to be a site where fan-made material can be put up? I'm given to the impression that this is what it was originally designed for.

It is already being done as Fandom, at the very least with sectors outside of published materials.

 

[nobby-w]

Why yes I would like that. On that basis, the TNE 1 and TNE 2 CD ROMS when you click to get the descriptions, the resultant PDF indicates that TNE 1 is "Essential Canon" and TNE-2 is "Extended Canon".
Hyperbole? If not, should they not be included?

'Comprehensive guide to canon' is a notion that turns up on this site on a semi-regular basis - in various forms. Nobody has actually done it, though, because it's a bit of a can of worms.

The FFE policy on canon roughly boils down to Canon is for publishers. It's there to stop folks from publishing items that conflict with each other. That also means that such a document is only relevant to a few dozen people in the entire world.

The obsession with Canon in Traveller fandom is unhealthy, and writing documents to attempt to codify it in some way simply encourages arguments about its minutae, which do little to advance the start of the art. Really, a canon guide would largely be used as a reference guide for folks getting involved in flame wars. In practice, I think that if such a thing were written it would be little but an attractive nuisance.

 

[flykiller]

Really, a canon guide would largely be used as a reference guide for folks getting involved in flame wars.

"How does it... um... how does it work?"

"I know not, my liege."

"Consult the Book of Traveller!"

"Traveller, chapter two, verses nine through twenty-one."

"And Saint Dulenor raised the Tigris up on high, saying, "O MWM, bless this thy Tigris, that with it thou mayst blow thine enemies to tiny bits ...."