Talk:Late Universal Century

i don't think the earth federation was declining i think they were not focus upon

they didn't reconize part of side 2 as the zansacre empire

the earth federation was in the zanscare empire wars from the very begining.

on of those reasons was of there economy the earth federation felt that if they could fix there economy they could pervent more zanscares

g saviour's not canon the earth federation was force to let zanscare have it independence earth federation was not in decline it had difficulty controling its colonys

G savour is not canon it was remove from offical production list from a official web site they recently started giving offical production there own websites http ://www.gundam.channel.or.jp/program/)

According to GundamOfficial, G Gundam is not part of U.C. time line, where as Victory Gundam is listed as part of the U.C. time line.

the earth federation could fight the way they wanted to it was due to the econamey it in some sources and it had severe red tape do to funding why do think colony riot moble suit was inveted it was due to fuding

G-Saviour and beyond

Gundam Halo, as you say, it wasn't mentioned in Gundam Encylopedia, but it wasn't mention as non-canon either. And technically, those that was filmed are canon. How can this be leaning to non-cannon more? --Bronx01 17:47, January 26, 2011 (UTC)

it was not mention in the timeline section of gundam fact file and when they had the opportunity to do G saviour they just did original gundam or the one year war agian that is classic way to tell people that they decanonize it by no longer mentioning it and also on ja wikipedia and gundam ja wiki they had not caught up but they lean torwords that it is not canon.

G-Saviour is unfortunately canon. While it's depressing to think about until Sunrise issues a clear statement otherwise, or makes a new animated work that contradicts it we have to included its events in the canon timeline. I personally wouldn't mind having G-Saviour and Victory Gundam just go away, they are the period in which both the technological and intellectual levels of mankind in universe and the production values and story writing out of universe entered the Dark Ages. Sadly we do have to acknowledge them. With luck maybe someday Gaia Gear will get an animated work and then we can finally burry Shakti Kareen alive, but until then we have to put up with the unpleasant side of the UC.

Cerano Agamemnon 15:31, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

g-saviour is not canon

G-saviour is not canon and ill' give you four reasons why

1. both japanese and english websites were removed

2. it was not mention into of most two recent gundam fact files

3. in the second most recent gundam fact when they end victory gundam they went back to the one year war

4.G saviour wasen't showen on the offical project list of the old gundam website

heres the crown jewel that proves i was right and you were wrong

Here is what they had to say. (It's the Second question, here)

if you say it on the old english that it's listed as canon they forgot to remove it from canon list partly it mainite at the time the old website was noteable for extreme lazyness case and point forgot to complete the gundam seed destiney project to english they never complete it an to this day they haven't —This unsigned comment was made by Gundam halo (talk • contribs) .

Gundam Halo, I wish you would show us this "official memo" on Sunrise removing G-Saviour from continuity. All you've shown us is that Sunrise is doing a poor job of pretending it was never released. --Zeikfried 06:00, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

As I've stated previously, no one wants to mention G-Saviour because it was so bad. Even though Sunrise hasn't listed it or made mention of it, all television works are considered canon by sunrise. Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 06:21, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

More to the point, Gundam halo: Think about the argument you're making all the way to the logical conclusion. If we deleted everything related to G-Saviour on the basis that it isn't canon, by Sunrise's own policy we'd be forced to delete every side-story and expanded universe material that hasn't been animated. Now, you could make the argument that Sunrise hasn't gone to the extremes with other works that it has with G-Saviour, but it would still play out the same way since your argument is about canonicity. We'd be forced to remove a bunch of stuff, with the added burden of the editors having to decide what information to keep and what to not keep. We'd have to comb through every article and then have a vote on what to keep and what not to keep. It'd take us a looooooooooooooooooooooong time to finish something like that, instead of doing something more productive like actually adding useful information. —AscendedAlteran 08:41, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

no no it is not canon look at it talk and reason im just both g saviour sites got delete and removed and there lazy the never delete probley iy was so minute they never even complete gundam seeds detineys page on the old site next time read my reasons and not assume

I am reading your reasons, Gundam halo, BUT...those are things that are totally unrelated to the canonocity of a series. G-Saviour's canon status completely relies on Sunrise (who distributes the Gundam franchise) to say, "G-Saviour does not exist in this timeline". GundamOfficial not updating their site since 2007 is either a result of laziness, or that Bandai of America forgot to shut down or update the site, because theres a redirect to the english 00 site...which hasn't been updated since 2009. However, Sunrise licensed G-Saviour as a part of the Gundam franchise. This is separate from Gaia Gear, which Tomino specifically wrote as being an alternate universe setting, therefore it's not canon.

Back to the point, a website being taken down has nothing to do with G-Saviour being canon. The movie is at least 10 years old and it isnt surprising that the website doesn't exist. Sunrise is still distributing the movie (I think). So in short, the proof you're using is totally unrelated to whether G-Saviour is canon or not.Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 18:53, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

gundam halo's going to edit it back, just saying. This wiki seemed to reach a community agreement to keep G-Saviour, but he/she's just going to do whatever he/she wants. Just protect this page for now to prevent this on-going edit wars. --Bronx01 (talk|contribs) 19:06, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Bronx. This just needs to be locked or something. I doubt virtually anyone on this wiki actually liked G-Saviour, but we aren't running a wiki on personal opinion. Personally I'd love to decanonize everything after F-91, but that doesn't change anything. I'll be damned though if the Late UC page is going to cite Victory Gundam as canon and not G-Saviour. Cerano Agamemnon 20:01, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be easier to just give them a month ban or something? Kit-chan 20:36, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

I actually agree with Kit-chan on this one. Gundam halo is just going to keep editing the page unless we do something, and locking the page doesn't really help anything when an editor actually has a useful piece of information to add to the page or even simply correct spelling/grammar/punctuation but can't because we locked it to stop one person from messing it up. A ban seems to be the best way to get the point across that edits based solely on personal opinion will not be tolerated, and still allow people with useful contributions to actually contribute. —AscendedAlteran 21:13, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

I think I already banned him once for like a few weeks. No one's actually going to touch the G-Saviour page so I'll lock that down. The Late UC page I'll have to see what I can work to see if I can ban gundam halo from editing that specific page.Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 21:22, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

In that case, if he does it again, ban him for a year. A few weeks --> A month --> a year, then if he's still got the tenacity to come back, permaban. Or if you're feeling more 3-strike-policy, ban him after the month if he tries anything. Kit-chan 08:10, August 9, 2011 (UTC)

Ok, so I locked down G-Saviour's page as admin only. Can't believe we have to put in this much work for one user -_-Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 21:27, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

I hate to say it, but I think Gundam Halo's actually right. MAHQ does back it up, now while wonderful MAHQ isn't the do all end all, however the Japanese version of our own Wiki also classifies it as "Alternate UC" both in its notes on canon and in its timeline [Google Auto-translated version] Note the last paragraph in "Authentic history" and the "Other season" segment of the Season section. G-Saviour is also not just absent, but conspicuously absent from GundamOfficial. GundamOfficial clearly did stop getting updates after SEED Destiny, but even the "Side Stories" list at the bottom of the "Other Works" page mentions things such as Gaia Gear fails to mention G-Saviour. So yeah, sadly apparently they continue to acknowledge flying space motorcylcle battleships over G-Saviour and Gaia Gear. Cerano Agamemnon 16:44, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

Well, at least, the G Savior information here, should be moved over to the G Savior page, for posterity. Hate to see the information gone just like that.
~ Azkaiel 16:49, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

GundamOfficial clearly did stop getting updates after SEED Destiny, but even the "Side Stories" list at the bottom of the "Other Works" page mentions things such as Gaia Gear fails to mention G-Saviour. So yeah, sadly apparently they continue to acknowledge flying space motorcylcle battleships over G-Saviour and Gaia Gear. What do you mean by that? I still found it here. And unfortunely, so far all claim that G-Saviour is uncanon are all coming from fan. They do claim that Sunrise announce it but nobody, not even single soul, can provide proof. And while our Japanese is more reliable, it too are editted by fellow fans.

And once again, I need to remind you that there's no Japanese word for canonical. So unless you can find official words removing it from UC timeline, it is as official as any animate work. Kuruni 18:37, August 12, 2011 (UTC)

Kuruni don't get me wrong. I would like it to remain canon. Your note about it still being listed is indeed valid, I didn't see that page I was refering to the "Side Stories" section of this one. Your example does more distinctly place it in a timeline along with Gaia Gear, implying the canonicity of both. There may be no Japanese word for canonical per se, but the equivalent statement exists. Either way I would rather it remain in canon, but I think based on the MAHQ note pointed out by Gundam Halo and the Japanese wiki that it may not be. Either way I think we need to actually look at the Japanese resources sites. I agree that we can't read Japanese, but I think that translation software while far from perfect should be adequete to confirm or deny this. I think we need citation on this matter either way. If we can't find it I think we should as a community contact Sunrise and ask directly, or have a user who is able to attend a Bandi or Sunrise panel at a convention ask and have a video recording. Point is it's not just about consensus, it's about accuracy. Therefore we could all be wrong and Gundam Halo could be right. It's a possibility we need to acknowledge. Either way I'm not editing any page on the matter one way or another until I have very concrete evidence. Cerano Agamemnon 20:00, August 12, 2011 (UTC)

That's a good idea Cerano, but would anyone from Sunrise even want to mention G-Saviour to anyone. It's like if you had a giant scar somewhere from an injury, but it slowly healed over time and no one could tell that it existed. That's basically G-Saviour, it hurt Sunrise initially but now everyone's forgotten about it. I don't think the directors or Sunrise had officiality in mind when creating G-Saviour. It basically stradles the line between canon and alternate universe. There is the possibility that the whole issue may never be solved, and that no matter what's happened, despite what Gundam Halo's said about the evidence of Sunrise's lack of attention towards G-Saviour, or that we're following Sunrise policy of all animated works (including Victory, sorry Cerano) being part of the official UC timeline, and G-Saviour being in the odd position of being a live-action animated work, and also given that it's the only live action Gundam work, Sunrise doesn't have a policy for those as far as I see it. Also note that G-Saviour isn't (as far as we know) anything like Gaia Gear, where Tomino specifically wrote it as an alternate universe setting, or like Zeta: A New Translation, where Tomino again rewrote some parts of the original series.

That being said, this may have to come to a consensus. Given that Sunrise may or may not want to comment on something like G-Saviour, a sorespot for Gundam fans, we might never get an answer. Though if it does come to consensus, I'd like all the users to take into consideration both the reasons why and why not G-Saviour is canon. Like I said, G-Saviour being a live action/CG animated work, and given that nothing's been mentioned about the movie for a while, official or otherwise, this debate could rage on for ages.Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 04:30, August 13, 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I agree and Sunrise is a corporation, even in a public setting a company of their size and nature doesn't handle things in ways that are the most attractive to the consumer. It's also true that G-Saviour is indeed a sore spot that they don't like to discuss, but Gundam X is for them too, so there's no accounting for taste. Either way, you're right it isn't the most readily availible information otherwise we wouldn't be having these debates. I agree, if none of us can prove things concretely enough consensus is best, don't want to argue, just don't want to be the one in the wrong either. And yes I only wrote V Gundam out of my own interpertation of the UC, then again in my own little mind G-Saviour never existed either. Cerano Agamemnon 07:39, August 13, 2011 (UTC)

kuruni edit the late uc page without permission so im editing it back ok

• And who give you permission? Seriously, nobody going to do anything with this guy? Kuruni 17:58, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Kuruni, if we ever find out that he's right, then we'll do nothing unless he makes bad edits with no effort. If he's wrong and continues to edit the page, we'll ban him. Gundam halo, you edited the page, also without permission, so don't do that. I've restricted this page to admin only because of you. G-Saviour is listed on sunrise's website but I don't see where it's listed as an alternate UC story. That points to The MAHQ interview was in 2005, GundamOfficiall lists G-Saviour as a official animated work (even though its a live action/CGI film...) so in the end we have two conflicting sources and Sunrise without a peep of it. On a side note, this page somehow acts like Gaia Gear is canon, and it isn't intended to be canon at all. I'm going to put a new header that says "alternate events in timeline" or something. I'll put the synopses for Gaia Gear there, and most likely G-Saviour. Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 22:14, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Putting G-Saviour in the Alternate Timeline section might be our only viable option at the moment. With Sunrise giving it the silent treatment, there's nothing else we can do really. —AscendedAlteran 03:20, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty much set on putting G-Saviour as alternate UC with Gaia Gear, but Gundam Halo, if you have any issues, please use the talk pages to ask questions and improve your grammarGaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 03:54, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

Gaeaman, will the UC203 onwards timeline be placed in the G-Savior article, for posterity ? Seems like a bit of a shame, to have that bit of information gone.
~ Azkaiel 04:00, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

I think it's fine if there's either a link to an "Alternate UC" page or simply have Alternate UC section at the end of the timeline like on the Japanese wiki. That way it flows similarly but has the addendum that it may or may not be canon for this timeline. Even with "official" and "unofficial" somethings are canon, some arent and it doesn't make much sene. Suffice to say the canon status is "ambiguous". Cerano Agamemnon 04:54, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

• I'm fine with remark it's events as "ambiguously canon". Leave it for readers to judge, rather than classify it ourselves. That being said, Gundam halo shouldn't be allow to edit anything relate to UC article. Removing other's edit is one thing, but acting like mod and claim that people must get his permission to edit is ugly. Kuruni 05:43, August 16, 2011 (UTC)
• Where did he say that part about getting his permission to edit ? ~ Azkaiel 05:56, August 16, 2011 (UTC)
  • Just above, kuruni edit the late uc page without permission. Now combine it with him unsign in talk page and typing without capital letter (and his edit even make link to unexist template instead of article), it's pretty clear that this guy has something wrong with his brain. Kuruni 07:39, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

I just did some research. The Japanese Wikipedia page doesn't address it as canon or not the English says it is, citing the GundamOfficial timeline. All the external links from both the Wikipedia pages are either broken, archived (and thus from so long ago that most were pre-release), or links to a very basic DVD info or sales page citing little more than cast and crew. Honestly i think the canon/official status of this production should be "orphaned". It seems that Sunrise has gone to the minimum amount of effort necessary to sell what copies are still in circulation, but wants nothing more to do with it.Not even an official website to market it. If there is an answer it's on a Japanese page and an obscure one at that.

And yeah GundamHalo needs to be using the grammar standards of well, any written material, at least for article edits, though he does bring up a good point. Either way we're a Wiki community, it's about evidence and consensus not unilateral decisions. Cerano Agamemnon 07:53, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

That's true, and we also have multiple conflicting sources on G-Saviours status. Leaving it up for others to decide I don't feel is very responsible for us as a community. If Sunrise had admin on here, I have no doubt they would delete everything related to G-Saviour. Gundam halo has (after actually reading the information he provided) has credible evidence to say that Sunrise regards G-Saviour as an alternate UC timeline (and the directors magically regressed technology back to the F91 era). I imagine that some people here will just want to leave it as canon because that's how it's been, but others like Gundam halo, know that G-Saviour hasn't been mentioned since its release and various sites consider it an alternate UC due to its lack of attention. Also, the evidence we have could swing towards either G-Saviour being canon or not, but most of these sources are out of date. By all rights if you don't feel as though G-Saviour is an alternate timeline then I'll revert my edits back. Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 16:03, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

I just did a post in response to Denbo786's edit to Gundam 0079: The War for Earth which is best classified as an Alternate Universal Century video game. It made it occur to me however that we don't seem to have any dedicated pages for the Alternate Universal Century. There are two pages Alternate UC 1 and Alternate UC 2 which are old and not necessarily accurate. I think that we should have a new page entitled "Alternate Universal Century" or perhaps "Alternate Universal Centuries" to breakdown some of the things which are clearly not canon, those which outright contradict events. I am considering adding the page itself. Maybe controversial material could be added there with an addendum or something similar. Thoughts? Cerano Agamemnon 20:56, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

My original argument would have been "the UC is all one big universe, no need to make a page for alternates." but after thinking about it, I thought, we have an early and late UC pages, why not have one for alternates. Before you actually get that started, what pages are you going to classify as alternate UC and under what requirementsGaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 23:08, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

Just ignoring your work doesn't make it uncanon, you need declaration. But if you really insist on shove our comment through reader's throat (GAH! I wish this place is Lolicon Wiki! That phrase would has much better impact!) lets open our favourite Can O'worm, start by make either MSG TV series or movie trilogy alternate timeline, then move next to Zeta...Seriously, this Wiki is already infamous for turning baseless rumors and fan speculations to pass on as poorly-researched fact, and while I would say we did much better lately, this will surely topple the scale. Kuruni 03:17, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

Sunrise pretty much need to confront/face this, imo, despite G-Saviour being their most hated work ever. I mean, they did it to themselves when they said that filmed works are official. And they also said they can decide against this rule too in some work. Seriously, if they want this out of their eyes forever, just announce it. --Bronx01 (talk|contribs) 03:49, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

Also, we're requesting that sunrise confront the issue, and I don't know who else is asking besides Gundam Halo. We may have to settle on Sunrise not making any decision about g-Saviour everGaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 04:51, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

Well, to counter the MAHQ's mailbag, this one was posted by our Mark Simmons last year. As he pointed out in other thread, nobody actually see Sunrise's declaration of removing G-Saviour from canon. Sunrise and Bandai try to ignore it, but isn't the same thing as removing from continuity. BTW, our Japanese counterpart doesn't call it Alternate UC, その他の時節 simply mean "other seasons" and the description simply say these works aren't mentioned in material books. Still that isn't samething as "removing from timeline" (and it sound neutral on the matter enough). Kuruni 06:57, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

I discussed Alternate UC a bit with Denbo and I think that it's tricky. I mean some works, Gaia Gear being the most clear, just need to be Alternate UC as their is no ambiguity. Then we have so many other works. I think that we shouldn't try to classify everything that is somewhat of a gaiden as Alternate UC otherwise if we did it would lead to the "turning baseless rumors and fan speculations to pass on as poorly-researched fact" as Kuruni mentioned (though i have no idea where this statement came from). I do feel however that adding things that a clearly out of continuity to a section to address them would be a positive thing. As far as the original Gundam films/series, well let's face it, even Sunrise isn't anything near consistent. Technically the films are canon, however I do believe there are at least a few things that rely on things that were TV series only in later stories, or worse an amalgamation of the two. With side stories that's fine, but in the canon animated work... whew boy. Word of God however is that the films are canon so I think it is necessary to go with that, but at least slightly adress discrepancies.

As far as G-Saviour goes perhaps we should simply rely on the best of our knowledge and research and state what we know - that according to Sunrise's policy it is canon, but briefly mention that it has not been maintained and recent material avoids it leading to popular speculation that it has been removed from canon. Cerano Agamemnon 08:06, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the Data Gundam books that were published recently include G-Saviour in their random information connections. There is a timeline entry in Uso's data profile page that notes the events of the movie as well as the game (Project Raven). A couple other odd entries have even made nods to the radio dramas too. As much as fans don't like it, it's here to stay. Deackychu 19:55, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

I think the question the two questions are 1.) Was it in the timeline or otherwise confirmed to be "same universe" and 2.) how best to cite that. Honestly I want the matter closed which to me we can do as soon as we can cite evidence. Cerano Agamemnon 20:00, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

Here's the situation though... there is no "same universe" or "alternative universe" for the Universal Century. All of the works that have been created fall in this universe. As Mark Simmons pointed out, just because Sunrise doesn't acknowledge it anymore doesn't mean it ceases to exist. Rampant fan conjecture and asshattery has lead to the dissemination of false information over the years and this is very discussion is one of them... and it all happened because the old Gundam official site on Japan's side listed something differently. But, more to the point: In the timeline titled 宇宙世紀年表「宇宙戦国時代編」 (Universal Century Timeline "The Age of Civil Wars in Space/The Warring States Period of Outer Space") denotes events from UC.0139 until UC.0224, therefore encompasing V Gundam, Gaia Gear and G-Saviour. Further evidence regarding G-Saviour is mentioned in Katejina Loos Data Gundam entry (August '05 issue of Gundam Ace) in the ヨーロッパの興隆 (The Rise of Europe) section. Deackychu 21:32, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

Katejina Loos section might also be this one, compiled in Data Gundam: Mobile Suit Gundam Character UC II (データガンダム　キャラクター列伝　[宇宙世紀編　II] ). (image provided by balofo of Mecha Talk) --Bronx01 (talk|contribs) 21:54, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

yes, that's the same one I cited above. It's just been reformatted for publication. Deackychu 22:25, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

Well nifty, then I guess that's that. Matter closed, good enough. I think it safe to say that's the most authoritive resource and I for one am just happy that we can now put something adequete on there as citation for people that have differing opinion. Regardless I do feel the need to note that there are still important distinctions of canon. That said I don't think we should start rampantly and arbitrarily classifying things as "canon" or "uncanon", I'm just saying that everything Sunrise ever did or liscencesd to a third party is "official", doesn't mean things like Mobile Suit Vs. Giant God of Legend: Gigantis' Counterattack happen in the canon of the series. Cerano Agamemnon 06:12, August 18, 2011 (UTC)

• Actually, by Sunrise's rule Gigantis' Counterattack is outright black uncanon work now. The story involve Mineva Zabi is contradict with animate work (Gundam UC). Kuruni 06:47, August 18, 2011 (UTC)

Grrrr... that's what I thought to begin with. I thought it was a doujinshi, (it has Ideon, making it a crossover with another anime series), but then I was convinced otherwise. Or do you is it somehow still official, my point was simply to point out the most egregiously clearly out of canon. Well this is a circular argument. I guess what I really meant to say is if enough works co-exist together in the same (clearly alternate) UC it should probably be addressed with a more dedicated segment and maybe a category for UC works that are blatantly out of canon. Then again this could lead to more G-Saviour like arguements, so maybe not. Cerano Agamemnon 07:08, August 18, 2011 (UTC)

• My point is, by Sunrise's rule, canonical can't be judge by common sense. In last year, both Gigantis and Unicorn have grey semi-canon status. Despite the former being utter weird and latter is carefully written to fit in official timeline, both are non-animate works that don't have direct conflict with animate series. Then Unicorn got anime adaption and the element of Mineva kick Gigantis to black area while Unicorn novel remain grey, although anything conflict with OVA will be black (like MSG novel is black). In other words, it isn't inclusion of Ideon that make it uncanon, it's how fate of Mineva is different than in Unicorn. Alternately, Gundam Sentinel and Advance of Zeta are grey works that have some element lifted to white, thank to MS cameo in Zeta movies. Kuruni 04:48, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

the Zeta movie's aren't canon, though, in terms of how some scenes play out. The cameos of some of the 0083 suits and the AoZ suits is believable. Kuruni, what exactly is sunrise's system for classifying things as having actually existed or not?Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 05:46, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

• Once again, there is no real japanese word for canon. All Sunrise point out is only animate works are "white" official, everything that conflict with it are "black". but they don't care to tell us which one is true events in case that animated works are in conflict. In other words, Zeta movies have same priority with the TV series. So how can we make canonical timeline? We just can't. We can make some outline, but Sunrise may ruin it whenever they want. Kuruni 05:59, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

So this thing is totally ambiguous. I have this nagging feeling that Sunrise has blacklisted G-Saviour for years now and they just haven't told anyone.Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 06:17, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

• Well technically A G-Saviour is definitely blacklisted. The PS2 game. And due to Sunrise's policy, that's pretty much the ONLY part of G-Saviour that was confirmed to be unofficial...Until Data Gundam mentioned Project Raven, so now THAT'S ambigious too. -The Phantom Impact - The ultimate Super Robot from beneath the heavens 09:44, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

The moral of this situation is: don't try passing things off as official or unofficial. There is no point and you'll only further confuse/falsify things in the long run. Personally, if I was running the place, I'd strike any mention of "official/semi-official/non-official" or whatever from the postings. Typically you can just say that fans are able to classify what they want to fit into the picture where, but it's moot trying to establish a long, hard factual listing. Deackychu 15:13, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

Well, thing is, Gundam halo is the one forcing the issue here, and making edits which we have to deal with...
~ Azkaiel 15:14, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

That's because it's not been mentioned or updated on by Sunrise and the page was created under the original assumption that it exists. Now we're all muddled in why and why not it's canon. I think Gundam halo's makign the point of "G-Saviour, by Gundam Wiki standards, took place in the mainstream (canon) UC universe. But according to other sources that we haven't paid attention to, its not part of the mainstream timeline, thus considered non-canon." I know there are alot of western fans that want to say that SEED (which in my opinion gets a bad rap from the final 10 episodes of Destiny) did not exist. Basically, Sunrise is the ultimate deity of the Gundam universe, except for Sentinel and Gaia Gear. Speaking of Sentinel, since it was made by Model Graphix and not Sunrise/Bandai, and Sunrise has to ask them to use the Gundam Sentinel designs and characters, where does this put Sentinel in terms of canon. I know I just opened Gundam's canonical pandora's box, but we might as well since we're discussing this.Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 18:30, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

Just because Sunrise doesn't mention or update a particular series doesn't mean it's no longer official. Victory hasn't been touched since Tomino last worked on it so does that mean it get flung off into obscurity? No. A website hardly trumps what Sunrise publicizes anyways. Besides, the site no longer exists anyways. If you want to be absolutely technical, go look up DVDs on the Gundam.info website and you'll see G-SAVIOUR listed for sale.Deackychu 19:44, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

Deackychu, while you're basically correct I do feel the need to point out the distinction between official and canon. You're right, but you mean canon, not official. Canon is nebulous and we shouldn't try to determine it ourselves. Official is what separates published material from fanfiction.

And as far as Gundam Sentinel, as with most works I believe it is canon up to the point where it conflicts with animated series, then the take precedence. As far as it contradicting other written works, well that's up to the reader to decided and would unfortunately be labeled as speculation were we to try to determine that here. It involves a Gundam with an AI system as a new technology, that's great, but so does Blue Destiny, this is a little inconsistent. Then again that goes back to the "actually fracking everything existed in the One Year War" strange original MSG worship. Cerano Agamemnon 19:01, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

As mentioned, there is no distinction between official and canon. Canon is a WESTERN term coined by fans... it does not exist in the Japanese language. They use the term 'official' then assign it varying shades according to continuity. However, by Sunrise standards, anything that is put out in print form is essentially not official but falls into that gray area. Ergo, things like Gundam Sentinel, Char's Deleted Affair, Gundam Unicorn (print form) never happened.

I don't really see an issue with the EXAM system or ALICE for that matter. Sentinel was penned first if memory serves me with Blue Destiny following later on. Deackychu 19:44, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

It makes sense that the OVA unicorn would trump the earlier released manga version. Since Sunrise defines continuity as any animated series, and granted that mangas (I think) are categorized by their relation to an animated production, such as F90 and Crossbone's tie ins to F91, and Advance of Zeta has ties to Zeta, and all those video games that relate to the original MSG. Those things are, for all intents and purposes, are part of the UC history. So in light of dropping the term canon, G-Saviour (taking out the acting and lack of attention), really feels disconnected from the UC history. The armaments of the suits feel out of place, considering that it takes place almost a century after Victory. So in that sense alone, the movie displaces itself from the trend of UC technology, where the mobile suits got smaller and more powerful. Gaeaman 788 - The sign of Zeta leads to a dead end 20:08, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

• Don't use tech regression to judge continuity. Things happen, 0083 has many tech that suppose to be "new" in Gryps Wars era. The Kappol (ZZ) perform worse than its predecessor, Hygog. And Galguyu is crappiest amphibious MS in UC era. Kuruni 04:53, August 20, 2011 (UTC)

The existence of the word "canon" in the Japanese language is irrelevant, an equivalent concept does exist. I use the word simply for convenience and no it was not "coined" by fans it may be applied by fans but canon is a valid English word. Yes BD was long after Sentinel, no they don't outright invalidate eachother in any way (though my knowledge of BD is lacking), the constant addition of new technologies and political scenarios to the One Year War simply make it increasingly less believable in the sense that it gains higher tech level than subsequent eras. As I understand it our timeline is taking into account all stated events in all histories that can coexist with those acknowledged by the series/films/OVAs. Cerano Agamemnon 22:10, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

Uh, don't know if anyone is aware, but someone has gone on and listed G-Savior noncanon and is using MAHQ as a justification. Now, just who the hell made this edit? MAHQ is not an official source, and, as much as I trust them, we can't use them in the place of official sources! This needs to be changed now.

As for dealing with this issue, if we need to make a seperated section listing G-savior as "Disputed canon", "unknown canon" or something else, fine, lets do that. But I am tired of seeing all this stupid, badly written fancruft reasoning for why G-Savior is or isn't canon. It needs to stop and its the one thing that is really holding this page back. I was the one who originally cleaned up this page and made into a more presentable article and I can't tell you how sick and tired I am of little fanwankers coming on here and adding garbbage to support their hatred of this show and not even well reasoned or well written garbbage, just straight up crap that they took 3 minutes to write. Now, when i added the notes on canon, I tried to be impartial, and list points in favor of both views and note that, barring an official announcement, G-Savior is by default both official and canon, but some people just must use their "reasoning" to make a case against, even though they lack any conclusive proof If this page just needs to only be editable to registered users or even administrators, so be it. And its not just this page but the actual G-Savior page as well. This crap needs to stop and I recommend this page start getting policed to prevent this kind of thing.Rogue Leader 1000 19:48, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

I thought such action had already been taken towards the end of the above debate and that it was listed as canon in locked admin only form. I personally haven't touched either page anywhere other than the comments and thus don't know, but this is what I had heard. Though you make a seriously good point that MAHQ is not an official source. They are very reliable, but we shouldn't rely on them to do all the work of research for us.

Cerano Agamemnon 20:08, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

The basic point is, Rouge Leader, is that there will never be any official announcement from sunrise. The conflicting sources of its status is an issue. And I'll have to go back and check who made G-Saviour non-canon. The tricky thing is that G-Saviour is canon, but it's really displaced from the late UC works. Both sides have given their justifications for G-Saviour's inclusion or disinclusion from the UC timeline, and since we'll never get any official word from Sunrise, and considering that what we have at best is circumstancial evidence, we will leave the page as canon. Now, as much as I would like to lock this page and leave it for only admins to edit, we also have to consider the rights of other people who want to edit this page with new facts. Right now it's going by visuals. If a number of people start editing the late UC page, then by all means I'll lock it for admins only.Gaeaman 788 -Will be mostly offline and touring London from Sep. 17-20. All questions and/or concerns should go to my talk page 22:11, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

that not exactly sometime canon replace while being removed completely without making offical statements some book or a panthlet is the offical statement by not being there at all starwars halo star treak and gundam have all done that rougeleader and also mahq gets it information from offical sources like they got type 61 tank to picture they got permission first of course get from offical sources so there.And also it's classic way if there really embarresed to say it is noncanon anymore.