Why do people always put "canon" in brackets like that, as if it isn't a real word?
I don't see why Van Buren wouldn't be canonical.
I put "canon" in brackets to indicate that it was "somewhat" canonical. It isn't official. That is just how it is.
As fallout titles are published they may change or ignore aspects of Van Buren . . . it has happened already. I certainly hope they do, as making Denver as city of dogs is lame . . .
As long as it doesn't contradict any lore it "could" be considered canon.
For example.
Trogs were suppose to have a small town together with the NCR at the west side of Hoover Dam and the lake was suppose to be highly irradiated filled with monsters.
This is not canon as shown in New Vegas that Trogs and sea monsters does not exist at Hoover Dam.
But Reservation "could" be considered canon until we get actual confirmation telling us otherwise.
Like Wannamingos, they're considered to have become extinct in canon by Fallout Bible 0, but is the entire Fallout Bible to be considered canon?
Until something telling us otherwise it's canon that Wannamingos are extinct and Reservation exists IMO.
So Dogtown is canon IMO, I just wonder if NCR still have their prisoner salvage team there.