Table:Questionable canon content styles

Discussion
Besides canon, there are three other levels of canon we deal with on this wiki: questionable canon (content from something that is not canon, but does not contradict events in canon (and may even build upon them)), disputed canon (content from canon, but has earmarks of being non-canon; flashbacks, stories, What-If scenarios and so on) and lastly non-canon (this one should be easy). Canon and supported canon, I will regard as the same thing for this purpose. In addition, questionable canon and disputed canon will also be regarded similar for this discussion's purpose.

When reading an article where content within the article (but not necessarily the entire article) is non-canon, these are sometimes applied with a small superscript comment saying 'disputed canon'. But I think we should go even further than that. I think we should make some 'section highlights' but without being too 'in your face' for the user.

I therefore propose the following section wrappers:

Non-canon:

This section describes content which is not canon, but is undoubtedly interesting to mention.

Disputed canon:

This section describes content which canon is disputed or questionable. It is most likely that this content is not canon.

Of course, content like production description or reception will be obvious to the reader that those sections do not deal with canon and we have no need to point that out.

Furthermore, there will also be a section for canon content within an otherwise non-canon article.

This section describes content which is canon, but the rest of the article is not.

Right now, these are merely suggestions, we may also consider versions without the border and padding. It is also reasonable to discuss how such a 'section' could become a list item, e.g.


 * Canon
 * Non-canon
 * Canon

Perhaps rather than a title, some descriptive text in the upper right side of the 'area'? React! --Sviptalk 15:48, 25 January 2012 (CET)
 * Sounds good. No objections here. I would only change some of the wording. "Which canon" to "the canon of which" and "article is not" to "article does not". Sanfazer (talk) 23:07, 25 January 2012 (CET)