EDIT: lol never mind disregard everything I wrote below
That's the thing, though-- the manner of the publishing doesn't really matter on a reader like this, but the canonicity is useful information
The reader uses the word "doujin" in the correct way and that's not going to change. But you seem to be suggesting that having anthologies not tagged as doujin makes it confusing as to whether they're canon? I don't see how – no officially published anthology I know of is considered canon for the original series
I'm not going to say that it should be tagged as a doujin, but maybe a 'non-canon' tag and the pairings?
We don't need this. If people are getting confused about what's canon, they need to stop using the irrelevant distinctions between doujin publishing, official publishing, anthologies, etc., and refer to this simple rule: Is it an original series, or a spinoff officially stated to take place in the same universe as the original series? Then it's canon. If not, it's not canon.
What does "official" or "unofficial" even mean in this case? Agreement with author? Published by a publishing company?
"Official" means recognized by the publisher of the original series. It can be used in contrast to a doujin publication because self-published works are typically not recognized in that way.
Touhou works are still tagged as "Touhou Project Doujin" + "Canon", I think
The ZUN Touhou manga being categorized as doujin is incorrect; the page even makes note of that. I'll look into it.
Bringing up the Canon tag again raises my point about the distinction before: pretty much only original series are canon. If we find an exception to that rule which might be confusing, like a canon manga by ZUN that seems like a doujin, we will let you know with the Canon tag.
last edited at Mar 9, 2014 5:30PM
.jpg?1550349656)
