Talk:Dead Men's Boots

Canonicity?

So, after seeing Detour's edits on Rack 'n Ruin's page, I wanted to bring this up. Honestly, my inclination is to treat it as de facto canon. Especially since my cynical side can't help but note that nary a word was said about Furman's canon claim at the time his Mosaic was made (even though the editor would know the claim had been made), and it was only six months later after the decision to cut him off with AHM and retcon things that the word came down that "Mosaics aren't canon".
But... I defer to wiki policy and such. --Jeysie 09:41, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

I don't think Detour is the last word here, nor does this Mosaic have any of the standard disclaimers others have. Really, the only part of this that could be written out of continuity is Rack 'n Ruin's death, and what are the odds of that?--Rosicrucian^Talk 13:58, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

You know, for whatever reason, even though I'm not a fan of authorial intent, I'm fine with seeing this Mosaic considered de facto canon, to use Jeysie's phrase. Then again, I feel the same way about Alignment and Hail & Farewell. I guess, while I consider the words of creators in isolation to be unpersuasive, I'd be willing to consider fiction from official creators to occasionally be authoritative, interesting, and informative enough to make it more-or-less canon.--Jimsorenson 14:11, 19 June 2010 (EDT)