If something used to be canon in Legends is no longer canon in Legends, should it still hold merit on the basis that it used to be Legends?

This is about feats and whatever.

To make sure I understand the question, would an example be TCW episodes or the films?

DarthAnt66 wrote:To make sure I understand the question, would an example be TCW episodes or the films?

TCW episodes and the films are and have always been canon before and after Disney bought Star Wars, so I guess the answer would be no.

Can you give an example of what you mean here then?

Probaly S-canon material that was later proven non-canon by newer material

A lot of notable novel feats would have to be dismissed if we upheld a strict fundamentalist interpretation of the old canon policy. Heck a few months ago many did, but now I think most agree that we need to be a little more flexible when it comes to comparing choreography to prose, the later is often more useful in determining a character's ability despite it not matching up perfectly with what is playing on the screen. 

I would propose this system, and it can potentially apply to other N-Canon as well: 

Feats from lesser canon that directly contradict what a character is capable of in G-Canon should be dismissed but feats that contradict only the film continuity but not the what the character is capable of should still be allowed.  

For example in the TPM novel, Maul sustains a series of minor cuts and burns and this was actually taken from the script. However as one can plainly see in the film, Maul has no burns and all subsequent adaptations of the fight follow that version. Kenobi and Jinn's scoring of superficial cuts shouldn't be used because it's a scrapped concept, it directly contradicts what all three characters are capable of. It shouldn't be used to hype the Jedi or downgrade Maul as Maul has proven in the highest canon source he can go the distance with the two of them unscathed.

Yoda stonewalls Dooku in not only the novelization but many adaptations, all but the film itself which is the highest canon. I would argue this feat should still be considered valid because what we see in the movie doesn't directly contradict Yoda's ability to stonewall Dooku if he chose to take a defensive stance. Relying on information from 4 official sources one of from the big man himself is more useful and productive in a debate about fictional characters imo than just shutting the novels out because of G-Canon policy.

DarthAnt66 wrote:Can you give an example of what you mean here then?

Sure. The Resurrection story from Star Wars Tales #9. That story used be canon as it took place in-continuity in the Expanded Universe as stats Chee in his 2006 blog and also another edited 2005-6 SW.com blog, and TCSWE solidified that stance. Chee did declare it as non-continuity this year though, but it wasn’t always non canon.

Latham2000 wrote:

DarthAnt66 wrote:Can you give an example of what you mean here then?

Sure. The Resurrection story from Star Wars Tales #9. That story used be canon as it took place in-continuity in the Expanded Universe as stats Chee in his 2006 blog and also another edited 2005-6 SW.com blog, and TCSWE solidified that stance. Chee did declare it as non-continuity this year though, but it wasn’t always non canon.

It was advertised as non-canon before it was even published, and the story has the Infinities label on it. Over the years, Chee has said it is canon but Hidalgo has said it isn't. Most recently, though, Chee came out and said it was non-canon.

Azronger wrote:

Latham2000 wrote:

DarthAnt66 wrote:Can you give an example of what you mean here then?

Sure. The Resurrection story from Star Wars Tales #9. That story used be canon as it took place in-continuity in the Expanded Universe as stats Chee in his 2006 blog and also another edited 2005-6 SW.com blog, and TCSWE solidified that stance. Chee did declare it as non-continuity this year though, but it wasn’t always non canon.

It was advertised as non-canon before it was even published, and the story has the Infinities label on it. Over the years, Chee has said it is canon but Hidalgo has said it isn't. Most recently, though, Chee came out and said it was non-canon.

All that shows is that the canonicity of the story kept getting changed. However, Hidalgo’s statement that it was non canon occurred before Chee said it was canon in that 2006 blog. I’m guessing that the reason why Chee said it was non-canon on Twitter was because the plot premise of the story was that Maul died from his bisection in TPM, but that was retconned by a magical thing called TCW, a T Canon source that is more canon because Lucas oversaw the show.