Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27729796-20180202001658/@comment-168424-20180202014745

A wiki has to decide for itself what is "canon". What sources do you consider trustworthy?

You said the antagonist revealed this info, but since it is the antagonist, lying doesn't seem out of the obvious possible range of possibilities.

As long time admin of a game wiki, in-game sources tend to be considered "canon" if there aren't any conflicting accounts. If there are conflicting accounts we would usually look at the trustworthiness of the source, with non in-game sources like creator/game dev interviews trumping in-game sources.

You may be giving an in-game source too much credibility. We haven't had the same situation in WoWWiki, but at one point a major lore source (one of the Blizzard founders and source of most early Warcraft lore) de-canonized nearly all the RPG lore that wasn't corroborated.