It seems that there is individuals, on internet, whose don't understand this "new potential mistake" as us.

If the other jedi from the episode have their name, but Sora and the Nikto have "...", it's perhaps because they were just the model. I hope. I hope.

By the way, they can use existent characters for their stories. Why can't they bring back some old characters, like Empatojayos Brand, Qu Rahn, Maw, Ranik Solusar, Corran Horn's father, etc.
So simple. So good for the EU fans.

What's killing me is that they KNOW Sora Bulq as a Separatist. They even precise that, if Sora survived, Eeth can do so. So they know the background. They even made Adi Gallia, a friend of Eeth Koth. They knew their sources.

So, WHY even THINK about making him in TCW as a Jedi in the Republic ?

I hope that they just modelized a character based on Sora's appearance, and NOT in the idea to actually make him Sora.
After all, Rex was, at the start, intended to be Alpha from the comics. So, PLEASE, creative team, make an effort : it's not Sora Bulq.

edit : yes, someone on the Wookie already deleted the mention that Sora is not named in the episode. This piece was erased :
The ''[Clone Wars]'' episode ''[Grievous Intrigue]'' features a Weequay Jedi as a background character. While design documents list the Weequay as Sora Bulq, it remains to be seen if this is a canonical appearance.

I have a question about holocrons.
Vodo's and Bodo Baas's Holocron are the same, called Tedryn Holocron.
In Dark Empire II, Luke met Ood Bnar and he told he know Bnar from the Holocron. By that time, there were only 3 known holocron in EU: Bodo Baas's from DE, Arca's from TOTJ and Vodo's from an other TOTJ. At the last pages of the Empire's End comic in the letters section, there is a question about the holocron. The answer of an editor refered to Anderson and said that Bnar is a gatekeeper of Baas's holocron.

That's why I think Bnar's (aka Arca's) holocron and Tedryn Holocron are the same. There is only one problem with this teory: TEGTAS said at the Arcanian section, that Tionne and an archeologist team found Arca's Holocron. But this could be an other of Arca.

What do you think? Are Tedryn Holocron and the one seen in the TOTJ:Saga of Nomi the same?

Regarding the Canon vs EU thing in the databank, it looks a lot like they might be returning to terminology similar to that used by Steve Sansweet in the preface to the 1998 Star Wars Encyclopaedia:
+
"Which brings us to the often-asked question: Just what is Star Wars canon, and what is not? The one sure answer: The Star Wars Trilogy Special Edition -- the three films themselves as executive-produced, and in the case of Star Wars written and directed, by George Lucas, are canon. Coming in a close second we have the authorised adaptations of the three films: the novels, radio dramas, and comics. After that, almost everything falls into a category of "quasi-canon." "+

The lettered canon "ranks" are for internal purposes in the event of a conflict to provide a default "correct" source until an individual decision is made. While T-canon is on a higher level than the EU, it doesn't mean that the shows and films are the only canon Star Wars works.

Wow, that's...unfortunate. It had always separated "From the Movies" and "From the EU" for some characters (for some it was all together, as with Anakin Skywalker) but not like that. Then again, the Databank as a whole tends to categorize things inconsistently, so it could just be an attempt to avoid the awkwardness of saying "From the Movies and The Clone Wars TV Show." Let's just hope it's not a conscious effort by Licensing to fully separate Star Wars into two or even three separate entities.

Ah - perfect! Thank you for providing that lukevanhorn, there's our example!

Out of curiousity, do we actually know of any concrete examples where a newer source is overriden by an older one? The closest I can think of is when they put Vaapad (which every other source in existence had as being created by Mace Windu) 1,000 years too early in Darth Bane: Path of Destruction by mistake when they meant really meant Juyo, but I'm not sure if that really counts.

Officially, I don't believe so - unless otherwise stated, all new EU sources are the same level, C-canon, and carry the same weight.

Unofficially, it generally tends to be the newer source that is correct, although as Pip50 says, all contradictions are dealt with on a case by case basis, so it is sometimes possible that an older source overrides a newer one (usually if there's an error in the new source).

All contradictions are dealt with on a case by case basis.

Also, even if it mattered, the 2nd Ed. of the Star Wars Sourcebook and the 2nd Ed. of the Rebel Sourcebook both came out the same year, 1994.