Halo Fanon

Halo Fanon:Not Canon Friendly

17,611pages on
this wiki

This page is official Halo Fanon Wiki policy.

Halo Fanon:Not Canon Friendly is an official Halo Fan Fiction Wiki page that covers the rules and violations of Not Canon Friendly template. Feel free to discuss on the talk page.

Defining Canon Friendliness

Main article: Halo Fanon:Canon Policy

Halo Fanon is built on the concept of writing within the Halo universe. Therefore, following Halo canon is key to writing mainspace articles on Halo Fanon, because Halo canon is what separates this wiki from other fan fiction wikia. Established canon should be regarded during the writing of articles.

If an article contradicts something already stated in canon, then the article is considering as breaking canon.
Certain things happened at certain times in the Halo universe. Authors should make sure to check dates relevant to their article before posting.
The UNSC and Covenant have specific ways they name things. While there are exceptions in some fields, in others, there are not.
Rank and Position
Rank and position go hand in hand. Generals almost never see frontline combat, and Privates never lead regiments. When attributing a rank to a character, make sure that what they do makes sense in light of that rank. Furthermore, Zealots do not command ships; Ship Masters do. Make sure that the rank you attribute is from the correct branch of ranking. Both the UNSC and Covenant have a clear set of ranks for combat and for naval forces.

Certain groups are already well defined in the Halo universe, and when attributing a character to a certain group, authors should check to make sure the character meets the requirements to have been in that group.

While individual characters do not have to behave in a certain way, one should ensure that the UNSC and Covenant, as a whole, behave in the way they normally do when writing fan fiction. For example, the Covenant are imitative, not innovative, and so if a member of the Covenant invents something by meddling with a Forerunner artifact further than the San 'Shyuum deemed fit, other members of the Covenant would deem this as heresy.
God-modding is when an author's article is overpowering and/or has no real weaknesses. The article may also be unrealistic and may also have its canon friendliness disputed, due to the previously stated distinguishing reasons. Authors should avoid making their characters too powerful or without any weakness, as this is not only unrealistic, but also unfair to other users, especially when participating in Role Playing.
To see an unofficial but helpful and in-depth guide about God-modding, click here.
If an article is unrealistic for conventional matters not necessarily having to do with Halo itself, the article can be considered as breaking canon, since Halo operates in a universe that abides by realism.
Lack of Halo
Authors should make sure they are actually writing in the Halo universe. Articles that have nothing to do with Halo, while not necessarily a breach of canon, break a separate rule, Rule 3: Fanon should be Halo related. These articles should be immediately marked with a {{Template:Rule Breaker|3}} and a vote to move them to the author's namespace started on the page's talk page.
World War 2 Halo
As the name implies, this is when an article contains pictures or descriptions of weapons, equipment or technology that has no place in the 26th century. This can go from soldiers in uniforms of the 20th/21st century to a UNSC weapon article with a picture of say, an M1 Garand. This mainly applies to pictures that would look out of place within the Haloverse, and offending articles should be tagged with this template: {{WW2Halo}}
Identifying breaches in canon include, but are not limited to the above list. Certain things that would seem to break one of the above problems might be explained in such a way as to make sense, and there are things that break canon that are not explicitly named here. These are just a general rule of thumb for identifying breaches in canon.

Exceptions to the Rule

Sometimes, articles break the canon of media that was not released when the article was created. If this happens, authors should try to fix the problem: of note is that in some cases there are exceptions, such as large alternative universes (i.e. Halo 3: Ascension).

Reacting to breaches of Canon

Not Canon Friendly

When any user sees something they believe breaks canon, they should put a {{NCF|NCF="reason here"}} at the top of the page, and then explain what the breach is in that page's talk page. This allows the author the chance to both attempt to justify the article and fix the article, if the mistake is not justifiable and was due to lack of knowledge. Users should keep in mind that not everyone can know everything, and should make sure to offer constructive criticism rather than insulting. Stepping over the line can be considered a personal attack. The addition of the NCF template will let administrators know to look at the page and talk page. If they agree with the user, they will say so, but if they agree with the author, they will remove the NCF template. It is important to note that only administrators may remove an NCF template. The removal of this template by the author or other users is not allowed, and may only complicate matters.

Rule Breaker

If an author refuses to or otherwise does not fix a legitimate issue with an article for a period of one to two months, the NCF template is to be removed by an administrator, and a {{Rule Breaker|4}} is added, to reflect that the article is breaking Rule 4: No direct contradictions of definitively established canon. When this template is added to an article, a vote to move the page to the author's user namespace is also placed on the talk page. It is a community vote; if users feel that the article belongs in the mainspace, they should vote against. If they feel that the article does not belong in the mainspace, they should vote for. After a few weeks, if a majority of voters have voted for, the page will be moved to the author's use namespace by an administrator.


Articles are almost never deleted on Halo Fanon, as we feel that it would be insulting to the author if we deleted their work, whether or not it belongs on the mainspace. The only times an article should be deleted are: author requests, if the page is blank, if the page is gibberish, if the page was created to be disruptive or for spam/vandalism, or if there is no user namespace to move the article to (such as when the article is created and maintained by an IP). Articles that break Rule 3 or Rule 4 should never be deleted unless one of the above reasons is true.


RULE ONE: Tagging a page as Not Canon-Friendly is not a "routine" and should not be taken lightly. For some, NCFing can be seen as a serious offense if used improperly or in bad faith. When tagging an article as Not Canon-Friendly, do it with respect and courtesy to ensure that no arguments and flame wars occur.

RULE TWO: If you tag a page as Not Canon-Friendly, you must have written the reasons as to why you've done so on the article's talk page. In addition, you should always inform the author(s) of the article at their respective user talk page(s). If there is no reason posted within 24 hours or that you fail to inform the author regarding their article being NCF, Rule 4 will be voided and the tag will be removed.

RULE THREE: All comments on article pages, especially in cases of NCF arguments, should abide by the following:

1. Be useful. Do not merely say that the article sucks, explain why it does. Offer pointers for making it not suck.

2. Be constructive. Instead of "your spelling sucks, this is NCF trash, you are wrong," try "you should run this through a spell checker, you should consider these canon contradictions before proceeding, and you should fix this."

3. Be civil. This speaks for itself. Any comment with any sort of derogatory remark directed at the user's person or the rater's person will be looked upon as a civility infraction.

RULE FOUR: No NCF tag shall be removed, by an Administrator or otherwise, until the argument on the talk page is considered settled. The only exception to this rule is obvious cases of flaming or vandalism. If an argument is disproved, only an Administrator can remove the tag.

RULE FIVE: Any article that has been fixed post-namespacing can now be voted back onto mainspace by a community majority or by having the approval and permission of three or more Administrators.

RULE SIX: The deadline for article namespacing after an unresolved NCF tag is now reduced to two (2) weeks, to compel the author to make changes sooner and to reduce the chances of a flame war.

RULE SEVEN: Please do not tag a page as Not Canon-Friendly unless it has a significant reason to be addressed. Tagging an article as such for a mistake as minor as "Colonel Ackerson didn't know about them yet" or "John-117 was born on Eridanus II, not Earth" is over reacting. Instead we suggest that such issues be be addressed with a simple heads-up note on the talk page. Again, do not tag a page as Not Canon-Friendly unless it is absolutely necessary. The template should only be used when you are certain that the article needs immediate fixing.

Advertisement | Your ad here

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki