This is long, but please be sure to read it all! 
Id like to start a discussion here regarding what we consider canon and what we consider alternate canon. Currently, the video games are our basis for an ultimate canon, while the other forms of media and games such as endutainment titles and Hotel Mario are considered alternate canon. I am aware that simplifies the task of determining the storyline, and something like this would obviously apply to many other series, in which the content of these alternate forms of media are retellings or directly conflict with another form on a significant level. But, not all of the alternate canon titles are retellings in the Mario series.
I can understand that our separation of mediums can prevent unnecessary speculation in certain cases. You look at this method, and it makes sense for the obviously alternate storylines such as the various anime and the live-action movie. However, like I mentioned, certain of these titles actually fit in to the timeline (we can discuss individual works later in the thread).
I believe that weve created a blanket statement based on the canonicity of other series and assumed it applies to the Mario universe as well. Son of Sons argues on the MarioWiki:Canonicity page that this separation does exist: based on the presence of the Official Nintendo Seal on the product (originally the Official Nintendo Seal of Quality). It makes sense, doesnt it? The problem with this line of thought is that the seal is only used on video games that have been published by Nintendo. The seal is a signal that Nintendo was involved to a certain extent with the product, but it does not say whether the involvement is like that in Yoshi Topsy-Turvy (not much) or Super Mario 64 (completely in-house). Is there really any difference from when Nintendo gives a 3rd party the right to create a Mario game and publishes the final result (Mario Hoops, anyone?) as opposed to when the 3rd party publishes it itself? (Hotel Mario, endutainment titles, Mario v. Sonic). The only difference is the localization team, if any is required. Also, Nintendo did not publish/distribute TV shows or movies during the 80s and 90s, when most of the other forms of media were created, so it is logical that they would not have distributed them. Nintendo was tied up with video games when they gave permission to DiC to create the three American TV shows, for example, so little involvement was given. The same goes for video games created when Nintendo is occupied with in-house games: other projects are given to 2nd and 3rd parties and are considered part of the canon. By arguing that a series canon relies on whether or not the same company published the various works that encompass it, you are breaking up many canons that are meant to be together, for example Mario Kart (the arcade titles were published by Namco). If you want a non-Mario example, look at Banjo-Kazooie.
So, the Official Nintendo Seal really means nothing regarding canon, but simply means that this particular part of the overarching canon was published in-house by Nintendo and was a video game. In other words, by basing our canonicity assumptions on the Seal, we are making the assumption that no part of the main canon would ever be told through any method except through video games, and that Nintendo should be regarded as a supreme, sacred company that can publish everything it wishes to be in the canon regardless of its current physical ability to do so.
So where does this leave canon? Of course, youre going to want to keep the video games because youre writing about a storyline common throughout, but what about everything else? Heres a list of everything I know about that is alternate canon currently: the American TV shows (four including King Koopas Kool Kartoons), the Japanese anime (four of them), the movie, the comic books, and everything else down to the movies childrens book.
It is my opinion that we should be evaluating each of these works individually rather than applying a blanket judgment. The movie obviously follows a different storyline from the video games (Luigi is younger than Mario, Daisys kingdom is in an alternate Earth unlike the Mushroom World), but The Super Mario Bros. Super Show features characters and storylines that dont necessarily contradict the continuity of the games. So, I would consider the movie alternate canon and the TV show canon, placing its storyline between Super Mario Bros. 1 and 2 (Japanese version) due to clues given in show. We need to argue and debate all of these, though, so please do so below.
However, Im sure there are those of you who are thinking right now about the significant differences in style between the different forms of media, and may have written them off as alternate canon as a result. But, Miyamoto himself in a recent interview (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8096&Itemid=2&limit=1&limitstart=0) stated that he felt the Super Mario Bros. movie did badly because it tried to stay to close to the format of a video game, when really it needed to follow the format of the movie. In other words, Miyamoto approves of the use of creative licenses in the Mario series for the purpose of improving the overall product and making the series work in the context of a movie, or a TV show, or a comic book. Please also note that Miyamoto does not shoot down the movie because it wasnt distributed by Nintendo; he actually states that his problem with the movie was that it was too true to the video games. Seriously, read the article. Its the closest thing Ive ever seen to Miyamoto flat out telling us what is part of the overarching storyline.
Please also remember that the video games themselves deviate tremendously from one another. You wouldnt ban Luigis Mansion, Paper Mario, Mario Pinball Land, or Mario Party from the timeline because they arent platformers. In the same way, we shouldnt be banning a TV show from the timeline for the sake of it being a TV show. Super Mario Galaxy director Yoshiaki Koizumi recently stated in an IGN.com interview (http://wii.ign.com/articles/838/838587p1.html) that, One of the best things about being able to develop a Mario game, is that the very concept of a Mario game is free and open. There are not that many fixed ideas. So we're able to go with whatever gives us the best options in development and whatever we can use to make the most fun game for the player. Again we have, straight from Nintendo, the concept that differences in the telling of a certain event do not render it from the main Mario continuity.
In short, other forms of media cannot be banned from the main continuity because of Nintendos lack of involvement: many games lack the involvement even though they are published by Nintendo. You also cannot say that other forms of media are inherently not part of the video game continuity: differences between individual games are too great.
What we have to do to determine canonicity is see if the storyline of the work itself makes sense with previously accepted works. Like I mentioned previously, some alternate forms of media are accurately separated from the main storyline because they tell an explicitly different storyline, but others have been banned solely because they do not fit our fan-based preconceptions of what the Mario timeline should be like. Banning one of the latter from the continuity is as conjectural as banning Super Mario RPG from the main continuity because Bowser worked with Mario, a story element which hadnt appeared before.
So, I challenge all of us to now look at every alternate canon source and analyze why it isnt canon based on its connection to the world of the video games or the world of another accepted source rather than its existence as a non-video game or as game published by another company than Nintendo.
Id like to start a discussion here regarding what we consider canon and what we consider alternate canon. Currently, the video games are our basis for an ultimate canon, while the other forms of media and games such as endutainment titles and Hotel Mario are considered alternate canon. I am aware that simplifies the task of determining the storyline, and something like this would obviously apply to many other series, in which the content of these alternate forms of media are retellings or directly conflict with another form on a significant level. But, not all of the alternate canon titles are retellings in the Mario series.
I can understand that our separation of mediums can prevent unnecessary speculation in certain cases. You look at this method, and it makes sense for the obviously alternate storylines such as the various anime and the live-action movie. However, like I mentioned, certain of these titles actually fit in to the timeline (we can discuss individual works later in the thread).
I believe that weve created a blanket statement based on the canonicity of other series and assumed it applies to the Mario universe as well. Son of Sons argues on the MarioWiki:Canonicity page that this separation does exist: based on the presence of the Official Nintendo Seal on the product (originally the Official Nintendo Seal of Quality). It makes sense, doesnt it? The problem with this line of thought is that the seal is only used on video games that have been published by Nintendo. The seal is a signal that Nintendo was involved to a certain extent with the product, but it does not say whether the involvement is like that in Yoshi Topsy-Turvy (not much) or Super Mario 64 (completely in-house). Is there really any difference from when Nintendo gives a 3rd party the right to create a Mario game and publishes the final result (Mario Hoops, anyone?) as opposed to when the 3rd party publishes it itself? (Hotel Mario, endutainment titles, Mario v. Sonic). The only difference is the localization team, if any is required. Also, Nintendo did not publish/distribute TV shows or movies during the 80s and 90s, when most of the other forms of media were created, so it is logical that they would not have distributed them. Nintendo was tied up with video games when they gave permission to DiC to create the three American TV shows, for example, so little involvement was given. The same goes for video games created when Nintendo is occupied with in-house games: other projects are given to 2nd and 3rd parties and are considered part of the canon. By arguing that a series canon relies on whether or not the same company published the various works that encompass it, you are breaking up many canons that are meant to be together, for example Mario Kart (the arcade titles were published by Namco). If you want a non-Mario example, look at Banjo-Kazooie.
So, the Official Nintendo Seal really means nothing regarding canon, but simply means that this particular part of the overarching canon was published in-house by Nintendo and was a video game. In other words, by basing our canonicity assumptions on the Seal, we are making the assumption that no part of the main canon would ever be told through any method except through video games, and that Nintendo should be regarded as a supreme, sacred company that can publish everything it wishes to be in the canon regardless of its current physical ability to do so.
So where does this leave canon? Of course, youre going to want to keep the video games because youre writing about a storyline common throughout, but what about everything else? Heres a list of everything I know about that is alternate canon currently: the American TV shows (four including King Koopas Kool Kartoons), the Japanese anime (four of them), the movie, the comic books, and everything else down to the movies childrens book.
It is my opinion that we should be evaluating each of these works individually rather than applying a blanket judgment. The movie obviously follows a different storyline from the video games (Luigi is younger than Mario, Daisys kingdom is in an alternate Earth unlike the Mushroom World), but The Super Mario Bros. Super Show features characters and storylines that dont necessarily contradict the continuity of the games. So, I would consider the movie alternate canon and the TV show canon, placing its storyline between Super Mario Bros. 1 and 2 (Japanese version) due to clues given in show. We need to argue and debate all of these, though, so please do so below.
However, Im sure there are those of you who are thinking right now about the significant differences in style between the different forms of media, and may have written them off as alternate canon as a result. But, Miyamoto himself in a recent interview (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8096&Itemid=2&limit=1&limitstart=0) stated that he felt the Super Mario Bros. movie did badly because it tried to stay to close to the format of a video game, when really it needed to follow the format of the movie. In other words, Miyamoto approves of the use of creative licenses in the Mario series for the purpose of improving the overall product and making the series work in the context of a movie, or a TV show, or a comic book. Please also note that Miyamoto does not shoot down the movie because it wasnt distributed by Nintendo; he actually states that his problem with the movie was that it was too true to the video games. Seriously, read the article. Its the closest thing Ive ever seen to Miyamoto flat out telling us what is part of the overarching storyline.
Please also remember that the video games themselves deviate tremendously from one another. You wouldnt ban Luigis Mansion, Paper Mario, Mario Pinball Land, or Mario Party from the timeline because they arent platformers. In the same way, we shouldnt be banning a TV show from the timeline for the sake of it being a TV show. Super Mario Galaxy director Yoshiaki Koizumi recently stated in an IGN.com interview (http://wii.ign.com/articles/838/838587p1.html) that, One of the best things about being able to develop a Mario game, is that the very concept of a Mario game is free and open. There are not that many fixed ideas. So we're able to go with whatever gives us the best options in development and whatever we can use to make the most fun game for the player. Again we have, straight from Nintendo, the concept that differences in the telling of a certain event do not render it from the main Mario continuity.
In short, other forms of media cannot be banned from the main continuity because of Nintendos lack of involvement: many games lack the involvement even though they are published by Nintendo. You also cannot say that other forms of media are inherently not part of the video game continuity: differences between individual games are too great.
What we have to do to determine canonicity is see if the storyline of the work itself makes sense with previously accepted works. Like I mentioned previously, some alternate forms of media are accurately separated from the main storyline because they tell an explicitly different storyline, but others have been banned solely because they do not fit our fan-based preconceptions of what the Mario timeline should be like. Banning one of the latter from the continuity is as conjectural as banning Super Mario RPG from the main continuity because Bowser worked with Mario, a story element which hadnt appeared before.
So, I challenge all of us to now look at every alternate canon source and analyze why it isnt canon based on its connection to the world of the video games or the world of another accepted source rather than its existence as a non-video game or as game published by another company than Nintendo.
