TAS is sort of the red headed step child of Star Trek, some love it, me included, and some hate it. Some like to say it's not "real" Star Trek, and it's not canon, but others say that it was Exec produced by Gene Roddenberry, produced by DC Fontana, and starred the original cast so how could it NOT be canon?
This has become such a muddled issue. Back in '91 or so, Roddenberry and his assistant Richard Arnold issued a memo in which they offered some definitions of what Roddenberry considered to be the canon. This was mainly in response to the popularity of the novels and comics; GR wasn't happy about some fans considering ST done by other people to be more "real" than ST done by him. But he also chose to declare TAS non-canonical, for a variety of reasons, including its often more fanciful stories and its low-ish production values, and perhaps because of legal uncertainties regarding its ownership with the demise of Filmation Associates. (Unlike all other Trek productions, TAS wasn't made by Paramount, but by Filmation under license from Paramount.)
However, Roddenberry died a couple of years later and Arnold was fired a day or two after that, and their policy declaration about canon and TAS was never enforced by anyone else (contrary to fan assumptions). Subsequent Trek TV producers slipped numerous TAS references into the shows -- not just the explicit "Yesteryear" references in "Unification," but references to Edosian orchids and the
Klothos in DS9, Vulcan's Forge in ENT, etc. Nobody at Paramount has ever bothered to make an official declaration defining the canon status of TAS, because (again contrary to fan assumptions) most TV/movie producers don't really think of canon as something that needs to be formally defined (since everything they make is part of the canon by default, so it's not really an issue to them).
Technically, "canon" does not mean "continuity" (contrary to even more fan assumptions -- basically there isn't a single correct fan assumption about canon). It just means the core body of work as opposed to derivative works. Plenty of long-running canons contradict themselves and disregard earlier portions of themselves. For instance,
Voyager disregarded
The Final Frontier insofar as the whole premise of the show depended on a starship
not being able to reach the center of the galaxy in 20 minutes. And all ST episodes and films referencing antimatter have disregarded "The Alternative Factor" in that using antimatter didn't destroy the universe.
On the other hand, TAS was produced under license, so a case could be made that it isn't technically part of the canon. But that doesn't matter. It's available for reference within the canon if producers of new material wish to reference it, and it can be disregarded if they wish to disregard it. But the same goes for every work of extracanonical tie-in fiction, and it even goes for things within the canon itself. So TAS's canon status really isn't an issue.
No, your site really deserves the credit. I love it! And I take this opportunity to thank you for it. 
