This question already has an answer here:
We (SFF.SE) sometimes use information from starwars.com site to answer questions.
As a random (well, latest) example:
This looks like "legitimate" source to me, since I assume that starwars.com is owned by Lucas Empire.
But I never actually ran into explicit confirmation on the canonical status of the facts cited in such pages.
Is there official confirmation of the canonicity (and canon level) of facts from starwars.com?
(I'm talking about "official" pages like Encyclopedia above, not random forums on the same domain).
To elaborate, what I am trying to ascertain is which of the following 3 situations is true:
starwars.com (encyclopedia) ONLY lists facts that are 100% taken from existing canon, with no guesses or additional wording that is not from canon.
starwars.com (encyclopedia) may list some facts that don't come from existing canon, but any such new fact becomes canon (of level ???) as soon as it's stated on starwars.com, assuming it doesn't contradict existing canon
Some of the explanations on starwars.com may include facts/wording that are merely someone's attempt to explain what we see in canon, but are in and out of themselves NOT canonical facts.
This last one is how Wookiepedia works. It does list facts from canon... but it ALSO lists facts that are made up by individual fans to explain small snippets seen in canon (but that include details NOT sourced from canon sources).
this is especially prevalent in G and T canon, where you have a visual from a movie/TV that doesn't contain great level of textual explanation attached to it, and therefore a Wikia article would build a narrative "explaining" the visual.