Talk:BattleTech Activity Book

Why is this Not-Canon?[edit]

Unlike other Non-Canon CGL products on here, this does not give any rationale for the Non-Canon tag. I am not disputing it per se, but I feel that it needs to be properly documented on the page: how does it fall short? --Talvin (talk) 22:02, 8 March 2022 (EST)

I would guess because of the set up for some of the activities. Characters and short scenarios that are not intended to be canon.--Cache (talk) 22:50, 8 March 2022 (EST)
Most "Non-Canon" products are either by third parties, or *explicitly* not intended to be canon. This is a product by CGL, and the credits include a team of six "Proofing/Fact-Checking" personnel, and I see no source to prove that it is not canon. Understand I am not just choosing a weird hill to die on, here: precedent plays a definite role in how we progress, and I am concerned that an assumption here could become a rule applied to another product. If we can't document that it is Non-Canon, then that tag needs to be pulled. Emotionally, I feel a pull toward "Apocryphal", but as I can't support that with evidence, I hesitate to add it. --Talvin (talk) 08:35, 9 March 2022 (EST)
After a surprisingly deep and lengthy discussion in the research-desk channel of Discord, it has been agreed that the banner should be pulled, and that a Canonicity section should be added. The wording of the Canonicity section is my own and may benefit from some tweaking.--Talvin (talk) 09:41, 9 March 2022 (EST)