Thanks mate, as the name of the thread suggests this was supposed to be something to keep me out of the way with licence to bumble around making minor edits. While I've genuinely enjoyed the conversation I don't want to take up any more of people's time so I'll try to wrap it up with this. If the canon test is ready to be added to the manual of style which tags would apply to the following:

• The Phoenix on the Sword (Conan)
• Midnight Massacre (Cthon/Marvel)
• The Curse of Fenric (Doctor Who)

My vote for all three (and other similar works) would be ADJ but I won't change a thing without a consensus.

I'm fine for those stories and those like them being moved to ADJ.

About redlinks; frequently I hesitated to remove some of them due to basicaly everything being linked to the Mythos one way or another. (eg World War II, Nikola Tesla, Shakespeare's plays, or as pointed above Alice in Wonderland) Sadly, I don't think it is possible to create a wiki action on this matter.

I don't think i could convey my thoguts clearly so here are examples:

• From Doctor Who I would put the TV serials "The Web Planet" or The Curse of Fenric as Adjacent stories. (they originate as non Mythos stories). Thus having the ADJ prefix when mentionned in articles.
  • But I would put the novel "All Consuming Fire" as Expanded. Having EXP as prefix.
  • Consequently, I would suggest putting the Animus and Fenric as Adjacent AND Expanded both. Their pages would then have the two logo templates at the top. (and a redirect link to their mainstream Cthulhu mythos entiy equivalent obviously)
• In the same vein, I would put most Conan stories as Adjacent but those mentions the Greta Old Ones or obviously Lovecraftian concept as part of the Circle Mythos. Thus, Conan himself would be Adjacent and Circle.
• King in Yellow would use the ADJ prefix when mentionned in articles. But Hastur would have both the Adjacent and Lovecraft logos on its article page.
• For comics, I would say the story arcs / issues written before a direct link with the Mythos should have an ADJ prefix, those written after the retcon should use the Expanded abbreviation. Characters that appeared/were mentioned only in the ADJ stories should only have the Adjacent logo, those that appear only after the retcon should have the expanded one and those that appeared in both should use both.

I am undecided if we should make it possible to have Influenced alongside and Adjacent story or only have the Adjacent one once an explicit connection has been made. My gut feeling would be to use the latter.

PS

• i realise that we don't have an Influenced Prefix created, so i will create one ASAP. The Oxford Dictionnary uses "Infl." for both Influence and Influenced so I would vote to use INFL with a magenta colour.
• I also am not a fan of using Red for ADJ since it's the same tone as red links, an unused tone would probably be better. (too dark would not go well with the dark display of this wiki)

I agree that we need an INFL Mythos tag and magenta works for me. I'd lean towards orange for ADJ but again I second the need for a change.

However with the Conan stories as an example I still feel that all the stories in a Cycle should carry the same prefix. The current canon definition of ADJ mythos stories can “include elements lifted in part or in total from the Mythos, but were not by their creators intended to be a part of the Cthulhu Mythos”. Otherwise those Conan stories are separated in the canon from their intended storylines. I would also reckon that the Marvel retcon (Calling them Many-Angled Ones) puts them further into ADJ than before.

I made the prefix changes, I kept a tone of red only to stay consistent with the Canon diagram and the template picture we use for Adjacent stories/concepts.

I am not the specialist about Howard but I believe that some of his Conan stories explicitely are part the Mythos. Am i mistaken?

@RingoRoadagain. Good question. I have been holding off on adding more Conan stuff to this wiki as I am not sure if they belong or not. Can the Hyborian Tales be considered part of the Mythos (expanded or adjacent)? Or is it only certain specific stories that are part of the Mythos (expanded or adjacent)?

That's why I was wondering about Price's research. Our canon page seems to be the only place I can find that splits the two but it's so detailed that it had to come from somewhere. As it stands we clearly need to improve the canon page but putting Conan in the Circle Mythos would be a big shift. Given it's size (big enough to have its own expansive wiki) I'd almost wonder if they deserve their own prefix but I'm also hesitant to start a path to everything having its own.

Also on a side note on the Canon page each Circle author has a number of stories by their names that are included in the mythos but doesn't say which stories they are. I assume they come from Price but does anyone know what any of them would be?

@Tiberius II - True, the Conan mythos has dozens of novels, over a 100 comics, and many characters / locations / objects, etc. I was planning on only adding a dozen or so important characters (such as Conan himself which I've already done) as in his primary companions and the main antagonists. In addition to 1-2 dozens races (e.g. Man-Serpents, Ape-Men, Winged Ones, Demon from the Outer Dark, etc), several Lovecraftian-like eldritch gods (like the newly created one in the new Conan series), a few story arcs involving those Lovecraftian-like beings, and several eldritch monsters. 

I put the number of "canon" stories by author from an essay (not by Price) which did not expand on it. I can not find it sadly, but I have no doubt in my mind that it would not help us anyway.

At the very least, I think everything written by one the Circle can be covered one way or another so Conan stories by Howard and their content would not get deleted.

But as for the rest of this franchise, when it's not related to the Mythos, it would probably be best to put it on the Conan wiki instead?

@RingoRoadagain. Sure.