Canon My Destiny Download

As you may already know, the goal of Destinypedia is to provide accurate and credible information on everything in the Destinyverse. To do this, however, content added to the wiki must be canon. This policy is designed to layout the standards for what Destinypedia deems as canon.

When editing on Destinypedia, canon is defined as the characters, places, and story that are considered to be genuine (or "official"), and are considered to have inarguable existence within the Destiny universe. "Official" Destiny canon can only be created by developers, meaning only content recognized by them is actually considered canon. In keeping with this, any material added to Destinypedia must be officially recognized by the developers and must be cited from a work created or sanctioned by Bungie. For more information on what Destinypedia is not, see our policy for how the wiki should be treated.

DOWNLOAD 🔥 https://byltly.com/2y7OKE 🔥

There are various ways of interpreting canon, but most cases will typically refer to two modes of interpretation: Watsonian and Doylist. The most common approach in most fanbases would be from a Watsonian perspective, in which information is interpreted from the standpoint of the text. This is sometimes called an "in-universe perspective". The Doylist approach on the other hand, utilizes a real world perspective, and as Fanlore puts it; "[t]hings that happen in canon happen because of decisions made by the author or TPTB; inconsistencies are probably authorial error. These explanations will sometimes be written right into the canon."

While both sides have their benefits, there are also several downsides which must be taken into consideration when choosing between the two, and while the Watsonian perspective seeks to amend canonical inconsistencies by presenting an in-universe plausible explanation, it can often risk veering into fanfiction and without an official source to support it, cannot be considered to be on the same level as canon.

Meanwhile, the Doylist perspective handles canonical inconsistencies by an explanation of what the creators were likely thinking, keeping the work grounded in the real world and letting us see what the authors may have been thinking, but it too can often involve just as much guesswork as Watsonian theories and can sometimes be misused as a platform for complaining about the story's direction.

As such, editors can use both perspectives to determine which elements remain part of the canon framework and which elements should be discarded to accommodate it. But the path to the outcome is rarely simple, and there is no guarantee that the inconsistency will be amended by the creators at a later date. Only with the community's participation can each theory be weighed, so as to ensure Destinypedia continues displaying the most accurate and consistent of Destiny information, and not a theory-based platform.

Here at Destinypedia, editors work tirelessly to present information to the community in the best possible light - these Destinypedians strive to interpret canon in a way that makes the most sense in the context it is given and causes the least problems in allowing readers to thrive with the interpreted information.

As the Destiny franchise is ever expanding, it is impossible to list out all of the sources of canon. The easiest way of knowing what would identify as canon, is anything released by an official party of the franchise. In lieu of this, any content released by Bungie throughout their contributions to the franchise from 2013 to 2021 will be considered as sources of canon.

The following is a simple list of sources for Destiny canon, and thus any material from these sources is content that can, and should be added to Destinypedia. Also note that this list does not present the entirety of canonical, but is rather a general overview of significant sources of canon.

"No man who has read The Aeneid with full perception remains an adolescent... In making his one legend symbolical of the destiny of Rome, Virgil has, willy-nilly, symbolized the destiny of man." -C.S. Lewis

Look Inside the Book

As for you, Cody. Not canon? Really? We've had co-op in Bungie games since 2001 and now missing a line of dialogue because a friend talks to you pushes Destiny's story to not canon status? Give us a break.

In calling historical women political theorists canon fodder, I am also using the phrase as part of a political critique. The works of these thinkers have been deemed by the gatekeepers of the canon as dispensable, relatively worthless, despite the fact that the texts have often not even been read by them, much less seriously studied, and that the standards used to mark them as inferior are, as I show in the following chapter, both questionable and inconsistently applied. All sides seem to come together in this: antifeminism provides rare common ground between socialist, liberal, and conservative political theorists, between individualists and communitarians, statists and anarchists. Women in general and women political thinkers in particular are, variously, ignored, underestimated, plagiarized, and ridiculed. They are canon fodder: attacked from all sides, their ideas are silenced, their protest punished, and their visions erased or mocked, for the sake of maintaining the beauty and purity of a canon that has no interest in the pleasure of their company. Their often nontraditional personal lives get the attention their ideas deserve, and are unimaginatively and disingenuously used against them, while every flaw in their work is considered potentially fatal, giving them responsibility for their own demise.

Overall, I show feminist thinkers throughout history wrestling with what the canon has recognized as core topics but has treated narrowly (power, equality, revolution), as well as those it has dismissed (childhood) or minimized (community) without sufficient cause and with undesirable consequences. I demonstrate what it means to search the works of a foremother for insight into a single concept (Goldman on childhood) and to join their analyses of core ideas to one another and to contemporary discussions (Cooper and Wollstonecraft on community). Throughout, I argue for more attention to documents, essays, books, and theorists that could enrich the field of political thought, and maybe make us all a bit smarter.

The official canon status of Star Wars roleplaying and gaming material published by Fantasy Flight Games has not been publicly determined by the Lucasfilm Story Group. In the absence of any such declaration, Wookieepedia has approved an internal system for documenting this information. The following page lists the full catalogue of Star Wars games published by Fantasy Flight Games, designating each item according to either the Canon or Legends continuity for the purposes of Wookieepedia article coverage.

In the penultimate instalment of the series, Emma Frankland details her experience staging a trans takeover of the canon with a cohort of trans, two-spirit and nonbinary artists. The article includes a set of recommendations for creating trans-affirming theatre spaces created by Emma and her collaborators.

[Our canons] interlink and crossover, creating beautiful spiraling patterns, Venn diagrams of intersecting violence and joys, but something specific about the trans experience is that, on some level, one must experience it alone.

Oftentimes the theatre industry does not work in a healthy way and actors often have the least input in a production hierarchy. We propose that a move towards a trans canon and towards decolonizing theatre must also move away from these damaging hierarchies. But we also recognize that in the shorter term, trans actors are likely to be hired under existing structures and expected to fit seamlessly into existing ways of working. This is unlikely to work.

Two-Spirit, trans, and gender variant people have been kept out of the Western performance industry and theatre culture for too many generations now and, if we are to move towards a body of work that one day could be considered a canon, it is necessary now to employ, celebrate, and center Two-Spirit and trans actors, directors, writers, and artists.

But unfortunately, there's not enough consistency with the movie lore for it to be canon. It goes beyond the "limits" established by the movies, and worst of allo, if you watched episode 2, then you might even remember a clear reference to LoA-to be precise, the hour-long special "Enter the Dragon."

I know this was released a year ago But for the sake of this post, I'm still going to reply. The only contradictions for Paws of Destiny is that Li Shan and Mr Ping (Po's Adopted and Biological Father) are still arguing with Ping still jealous of Li even though he ended that jealousy in Kung Fu Panda 3. And that's pretty much it. Other Then That Paws of Destiny is canonical to the Kung Fu Panda Movies, with the show makes it clear that Panda Village is quite different then how it was in Kung Fu Panda 3, and has since been peaceful after Kai's Defeat, In fact Li even brings up the Panda Village Fight Scene from Kung Fu Panda 3. Something that comes to my intention is that apparently the Kung Fu Panda Animated Series from Nickelodeon is not canon for some reason, despite the fact it was between Kung Fu Panda 1 & 2. And other then some continuity errors, like, all TV Shows Based On Movies, it was, for the most part, still canonical, even more so that the character from Paws of Destiny, Bunnidharma flat out mentioned a character named Fe-Pa, who was a character from the Nick Kung Fu Panda Series, which still means both shows are still canonical. Although that's me which is just odd, considering the fact that there is only one Kung Fu Panda Series, or Movie, that contradicts the most, and it's not the nick series. 006ab0faaa