This page is an official policy on the Forgotten Realms Wiki. It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.

Canon is the term given to a piece of Realms- or D&D-related information that establishes its status as an official part of the Forgotten Realms fictional universe.

DescriptionEdit

There is no generally accepted, official hard-and-fast set of rules given by Wizards of the Coast for determining outright what is canon, so this policy provides the guidelines for determining what is canon on this wiki.

Canon, according to Ed Greenwood, is any published source relating to the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting. This means that if it is for sale in paper (or digital) form then it is official Realmslore. Editors at this wiki have pointed out that this would technically make video games canon, which would cause inherent problems, such as the outcome of a decision by a player to kill Drizzt Do'Urden in the course of gameplay.

Some authors disagree with Ed's view. Richard Baker for example, when asked about the Baldur's Gate series, claims that canon in the Forgotten Realms is whatever you make of it. You can choose whether a particular work is canon or not.

Most are more inclined to agree with Greenwood as he is the 'father' of the Forgotten Realms. In the case of the Baldur's Gate series, their popularity, coupled with a sourcebook and several Dragon Magazine articles means that in the eyes of many respected members of the Forgotten Realms community it, as it appears in the game, is almost as much canon as the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting.

The conclusion is that the wiki needs to establish for itself what it considers canon, and has done so through general consensus of its editors. What you personally consider canon, or even what a Realms author or employee of Wizards of the Coast considers canon, is not necessarily canon on this wiki.

Feel free to discuss articles marked as non-canon on their respective talk pages.

OriginsEdit

The original discussions relating to what is and what is not canon can be found on the talk page and on Forum:Revised canon policy. Further discussion should be carried out on the talk page.

ContradictionEdit

Despite fact checking and research at Wizards of the Coast, discrepancies in the canon exist. Documenting the discrepancies is as much a part of writing for the wiki as documenting the Realms itself.

The article author is not at liberty to pick and choose which information should be included and which should be left out. A hierarchy exists to determine which information should be given preference when a contradiction is discovered, but the less preferable information should not be excluded.

HierarchyEdit

The wiki uses a hierarchy to determine, if two sources contradict one another, which is preferred. See Help:Citing sources for more information on how to reference a given source.

Realms sourcebooks 

Includes sourcebooks, boxed sets, and other gaming-related products, but not video games. Only includes sourcebooks relating to the Forgotten Realms universe. This includes Forgotten Realms, Al-Qadim, Kara-Tur and Maztica. Base Forgotten Realms takes priority over sources based in other continents, but there is no specific preference between Al-Qadim, Kara-Tur and Maztica. This does not include core D&D products. See Category:Sourcebook citation templates.

Realms novels 

A fictional work telling a story. Applies to both printed and digital novels, provided they have been published by TSR, Inc, Wizards of the Coast, or can be demonstrated as within Realms canon. See Category:Novel citation templates.

Realms-based magazines and online articles 

Includes Dragon magazine, Dungeon magazine, and information from the Wizards of the Coast website written specifically about the Realms. Applies to both printed and online editions of the magazines. Where online is concerned, only official articles are considered. This excludes forum posts, discussions, and Realms authors' work on non-Wizards websites. See Category:Dragon citation templates, Category:Dungeon citation templates, and Category:Web citation templates.

Core D&D sourcebooks 

Any published official D&D source is considered canon in the Realms, with some caveats. A core D&D spell would be considered canon, but in a core D&D adventure that introduces new physical locations and characters, these locations and characters would not.

Core D&D magazines and online articles 

Includes Dragon magazine, Dungeon magazine, and information from the Wizards of the Coast website written about the core D&D product. The same caveats apply as for "Core D&D sourcebooks" above.

Video games 

Applies to console games, PC/Mac games and other forms of electronic entertainment. See Category:Game citation templates.

Forum posts 

Cannot be considered canon unless made by a Wizards of the Coast employee. Can generally be considered canon but might warrant discussion for individual cases. For citing the forums at the Candlekeep website, see {{Cite web/Candlekeep forum}}.

AgeEdit

Age is a secondary factor in determining preference of information. If two sourcebooks contradict one another, the more recently published should be considered preferable. If a new novel contradicts an old sourcebook, the sourcebook should be preferred since it is higher in the hierarchy.

EditionsEdit

Equal preference is given to all editions of the game. Editors are not at liberty to prioritise one edition above another. The lore is generally unchanged from edition to edition, but contradictions arising in different editions should favour the newer edition, but care should be taken to make mention of all editions and reference each.

Where history is concerned, each edition has a different date, so the usual method is to list each piece of information in chronological order.

Realms-specific versus generic D&DEdit

Realms-specific sources (of any kind) should be preferred to generic D&D ones. Age is not a factor in this decision.

Sourced versus unsourcedEdit

As per Help:Citing sources, an unreferenced piece of information may never be taken in preference to a referenced one. It is not simply good enough to claim that a piece of information exists within a source. It must be referenced as accurately as possible so that the reader may choose to check of his or her own accord, and verify that it is the case.

RetconsEdit

A retcon should always be considered to override any information in the source material, provided it is from a Wizards source.

Common senseEdit

The above are simply guidelines and common sense must prevail. It is not outside the realms of possibility that an obvious flaw in the canon will be published that will fall outside the guidelines set in place above. In this situation, the preferred order of information should follow common sense.

DisputesEdit

This policy is clear that in the case of discrepancies in the information, all versions should be included, with references, but preference should be given to one particular version, the details of determining preference having been provided above.

However, should a dispute arise on what is preferable to what, as per the usual wiki policies on discussions, this should be conducted in a civil and productive manner. A general consensus should be reached before the order of preference is determined.

Removing or altering a valid, referenced piece of information is never an acceptable resolution to a discrepancy in the source material.