From Holocron - Star Wars Combine
Jump to: navigation, search

Timeline Revision

I won't go ahead and rewrite the timeline (even though it's a wiki), but it seems an opportune time to bring this up. The current pre-SWC timeline is somewhat... Sith- and Vodo-heavy, and reads like the prequel movies with certain names adjusted, lacking a real 'break' with canon at some point in the past as was originally desired.

I'd been working on a SWC history book (most of which I expect will now become part of this wiki), and I used a brief timeline I'd written long ago for the timeline project to try and flesh out a good pre-Combine history of the galaxy. My original timeline was well received, so I'd be interested in seeing if people would consider making this the new background. You can read it here - note that it doesn't stop pre-SWC, but continues into SWSim era. Orphaea Imperium 09:52, 22 February 2011 (GMT)

Please leave discussion here for whether or not a new timeline is necessary and criticism of my proposed timeline on the other page. Orphaea Imperium 10:15, 22 February 2011 (GMT)
As per Orphaea Imperium's request, I substituted her version of BCGT history here. It remains to be discussed whether we should split the page into two separate pages: BCGT history and CGT history due to the page size warning being displayed... - Kinsa Rha, 3.05.2011, 9:16 GMT
Since when does Orphaea decide official history of SWC? especially when the BCGT timeline now contradicts itself in multiple places and the official one posted on SWC's website. --Xanyarr Chyakk 10:10, 3 May 2011 (GMT)
Orphaea said the leaders of the factions do not mind the merge. And we could split the Timeline into two parts (like I mentioned before) and work a bit more on the pre-Combine history so that it doesn't contradict itself and incorporates both sources. I tried to do it at first, but gave up - the Timeline as a single page is too much ... - Kinsa Rha, 3.05.2011, 10:46 GMT
Point the first: I merely stated that the relevant faction leaders don't mind the substitution. I never said, nor do I think I even implied, that anyone should go ahead and make the substitution. The only person that could make such a definitive call is Veynom. This is why my history was kept on a user subpage and not in the timeline proper.
Point the second: The 'official' timeline has been widely recognised as lacking and effectively a poor rewrite of the prequel movies with a handful of SWC characters substituting original characters. There's little there of value salvaging that isn't already in my rewrite.
Points third and fourth: See Below.
Orphaea Imperium 13:42, 3 May 2011 (GMT)
I undid my edit (Orphaea's BGCT history). The only thing that stayed was the Notes on Dating section, which is necessary for the newbies to understand the whole timeline. And now I think it's time to work on splitting the growing monster of a page into parts. - Kinsa Rha, 3.05.2011, 17:12 GMT

Timeline vs History

I think we should separate written history with timeline-format history. The jump is sudden and doesn't add anything. Perhaps the written content could be removed to 'History of the Galaxy' or a similar page, and the timeline kept a strict list of dates. Orphaea Imperium 13:42, 3 May 2011 (GMT)

That's what I suggested above. - Kinsa Rha, 3.05.2011, 14:16 GMT
Done. --Xanyarr Chyakk 11:37, 16 May 2011 (GMT)

Relevant Events

I think we need to do a proper cull of what's included in the timeline. As a timeline of galactic history, it should really be limited to galactic events. For example, 'Day 338: Adam A. Flynn, along with several Black Sun agents, take over the New Republic.' is a relevant galactic event. 'Day 64: Hornithicus is appointed as the new head of security for Cyber Technologies.' is not a relevant galactic event. Such non-relevant dates are probably a result of this timeline having been created by merging a number of private timelines, which would have had their own authors and interests. Orphaea Imperium 13:42, 3 May 2011 (GMT)

Maybe leave the galactic events here and move the others to another page? "Less Important Events" or some such? - Kinsa Rha, 3.05.2011, 14:18 GMT
Problem is to define what's a galactic event. We could try to split the timeline into one for the Government Events (including wars) and one timeline for the small faction events? --Abyhsen Squeegor 11:58, 7 November 2011 (GMT)

Breaking up the timeline

I suggest we break up the timeline further into separate articles for each year, and include/transclude those article in this one. That would allow for timeline article to stay a list of all events, but would also allow to have independent articles for each year. The only difference will be that people will need to edit the article for each year when they add events, instead of editing one big timeline article. Any thoughts? --Xanyarr Chyakk 20:02, 19 June 2011 (GMT)

I agree. I also think this is inevitable. Eventually, a single Timeline page would be far too long; hence, splitting the Timeline into articles for each year is better. -- Rupert Havok 20:06, 19 June 2011 (GMT)

I was thinking of still including/transcluding the pages via {{:year #}} tags. That would allow to still have an overview page, where everything can be seen at once, but page for each year would have to be edited separately... --Xanyarr Chyakk 09:09, 28 June 2011 (GMT)

Where did the dates go?

I gave Drak`ora Sabosen some time to tell me before I will reverse his cahnges. But can't see a reason for them yet.--Dreighton 22:53, 29 June 2011 (GMT)

He somewhat misinterpreted what I intended to do in the topic above this one. I will implement my version in a minute or so... --Xanyarr Chyakk 10:21, 30 June 2011 (GMT)
Xanyarr is right, I misinterpreted what was discussed here about splitting up the timeline. Had connection issues yesterday, so apologize for the delayed responseDrak`ora Sabosen 17:43, 30 June 2011 (GMT)

Link for reference

This link might prove useful when tracking down dates in the murky era of Year 5 to Year 6. -- Rupert Havok 10:13, 26 June 2012 (GMT)