I see where your coming from but I didn't mean any disrespect to any writer's work.
Actually, as a longtime Doctor Who fan I'm used to a fictional universe where everything counts. Both Executive Producer Russell T. Davies and his successor Stephen Moffatt have stated that because the show deals with time travel that every story in any form no matter how contradictory can and does count. The easy explanation for discrepancies is that time travel changes time and creates the alternate versions of events.
In fact, The Doctor himself has discussed his ever changing timeline with his companions. Adric tried to read The Doctor's diary but had trouble because it kept changing and the Doctor explained that was because his past was always changing. And Amy asked why she could remember two personal histories when a time change happened. The Doctor explained that both versions of her life happened and that this was a common occurrence for himself.
Although, this is an incredibly easy explanation for any contradiction, fans still try to reconcile those contradictions in other ways. Why? Just for fun.
And that's kind of where I was coming from. I know that no expanded universe story counts as canon for Star Trek, but I thought it would be fun to know about continuity and discontinuity in the novels, comics, etc., just for the fun of it. And then maybe I could used this info to build a personal timeline of extended Star Trek of my own.
I assume that Star Trek fiction could fit into 3 forms: stories that link, stories that stand in their own with no major continuity between them and thus no major contradictions, and stories that offer events that can't coexist with the events in other stories. The first set is covered in the Charting the Novel-verse thread, but I was just looking for info on the others.
Once again, I didn't mean disrespect to any writer or story, just wanted to learn about the differences between them.