Forum:Source for authentic info

Over in the Talk:Candace Flynn page, we've started the discussion of what should be considered a valid source of information for this wiki. So far, we have used the following:
 * The episodes.
 * The first DVD.
 * Dan Povenmire Correspondence.
 * YouTube videos featuring Dan and/or Swampy, if they are publicly accessible.
 * Wikipedia.

Other items previously used as a valid source, or to be considered as valid source:
 * The storybooks, starting with Speed Demons and Runaway Hit.
 * Private responses on YouTube from Dan and/or Swampy, when they can be verified or are made publicly accessible.
 * Interviews published on websites with the show's creators or actors, such as from The National Ledger or Everything Alabama.
 * Interviews or other promotions published on YouTube, such as the cast discussing the show.
 * Future DVD releases.
 * Well-known and reputable websites, such as The Internet Movie Database. (But even these are not infallible.)

What should not be considered a valid source:
 * Speculation, especially when no reference is provided for the basis of the speculation.
 * (Speculation regarding an Allusion is allowed if you are not 100% sure of the connection to the item you are referencing, as long as you state it as such. For example, "The episode appears to be a reference to...". This leaves it open to confirmation by other members of the community, rather than being presented as a fact.)

Regarding the new storybooks:

The books should be checked to see if they deviate from the episodes they are depicting.

There's an old story about people asking Gene Roddenberry at one of the first Star Trek conventions when they would be seeing a particular character in one of the movies. The character was from one of the early novels published by Pocket Books in the 1980s. Gene didn't know anything about the character (which might have been named Piper from about the 4th novel or so, if my memory [RRabbit42] is correct), so the rule became that something was canon only if it was seen in the TV series or the movies. The side-effect was that the novelization of Star Trek: The Motion Picture, which Gene co-wrote, isn't considered an official part of the Star Trek universe.

The Star Wars novel Splinter of the Mind's Eye has a very different outcome for Darth Vader than what we saw in Return of the Jedi, so it's not considered canon.

Contrast those with the Babylon 5 novels. The first 8 were based on outlines provided by the show's creator. They have some canon elements in them. But book #9, To Dream in the City of Sorrows, has a forward by him that says it is "an official, authorized chapter in the Babylon 5 story line".

Since we're dealing with picture books, chances are that we won't have any problems with them contradicting what's in the episodes, but we shouldn't automatically assume that because they say "Phineas and Ferb" and "Disney" on the cover that they're 100% canon.

- - - -

The floor is now open for discussion. — RRabbit42 07:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)