epronovost wrote:
@sgt_smudge

Actually, if you look at the biblical canon for example (the grand dad of all canon so to speak). Yes, the most popular version/vision is what was defined as canon. A canon is simply a set of beliefs or idea commonly held about something or considered true by a majority. A canon has no factual value. A ''true canon'' only exist if it's possible to prove a story. Since 40K is a fiction, there can be no facts, only commonly accepted idea that forms a canon and GW doesn't enforce any form of canon on people for obvious reasons and they don't value their fluff over that of their customers. Now, we can discuss the virtues, characteristics and consequences of certain pieces of fluff, but we can hardly make turth claim unless it's self referential. Thus, has GW described Corax as a man is a factual statement with evidence. Is Corax a man is open to people declaring that Corax is acutally a man or a woman. The canon answer would be the most commonly agreed answer, but that doesn't mean that the people who don't agree with the majority are ''wrong'' to consider Corax a woman. At best you can critique the logic behind that choice.