Template talk:Timeline

The Following is from various pages:

Eds Formating Project
Talk:Timeline

Before I undertake this project, I'm going to explain it right here so everyone will understand. I think this page is too big and cumbersome to be of much use. So I'm going to split it into articles for each year. At the same time, I'm going to make a seperate "production" timeline from a real world point of view. That way, the timelines are more organized, attractive and useful. -ED 03:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Done
 * Where did the real-world timeline end up? --Andrew Nagy 07:30, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Talk:2552 I suggest that we make a number of articles for each important year (2517, 2525, 2552, etc.) and put them all into a category: Timeline. At the same time, we could make a "2001 Productions", "2002 Productions", etc to cover the real world history of the developments and releases in the Halo universe. Another idea similar to the one at memory-alpha.org. -ED
 * Done

Remove Fan Fiction
The c. 17,448B.C.E and c. 7,448 B.C.E were added on 17:44, 24 May 2006 by the IP:195.93.21.103. There is no evidence to support these dates and they're suspected of being FanFiction. -- 05:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

B.C.E.?
Okay, I know this is really a big subject of dispute, sorta between conservatives and liberals, but I don't care, I'll make it a dispute between me and whoever disputes against me: Should we use B.C.E. and C.E. or B.C. and A.D.? I personally vote for...
 * B.C. and A.D. g ü é ß Ł ¥ -π é Ґ ∫ ø ñ ¥ -† ħ î <font color="#00ff00">И <font color="#44ff44">g <font color="#99ff99">¥  08:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: It'd be nice if one or the other were used in canon, but I can't think of a case of that offhand. --Andrew Nagy 07:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * BCE and CE based on The Halo Universe 101. --Andrew Nagy 06:57, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Alternate timeline
I've started my own timeline here that lists stories rather than events; anyone who wants to move it to this wiki can feel free. --Andrew Nagy 07:30, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Updating the template
I've been noticing the template page a lot lately and thought it could use some revisions:
 * Remove "Military Calendar" — A significant portion of the dates on this timeline fall before the formation of the United Nations Space Command and do not adhere to the concept of the Gregorian military calendar. Considering that everything in the universe is already pretty much written to Earth standards (12 month years, 24 hour days), including Forerunner and Covenant subjects, and that a number of newer products for don't include military calendar in time and setting entries, this is an antiquated inclusion.
 * Separate out real-world years from fictional — As it is noted in "military calendar", real-world years really wouldn't apply to a fictional application of time even if they do share the same standards. Including real-world years (1999-2015) seems like more happened in the universe in our own time than actually did, which is very little when it only applies to i love bees and the non-canon Dead or Alive 4. We don't need to create separate pages like 2004 (Universe) and 2004 (Real World), but rather create a wholly separate scroll list for these dates. The pages themselves would remain separated by in-universe and real-world sections.


 * I believe there won't be much disagreement with #1, so I will go ahead remove that. Regarding #2, a separate scroll list would be counter-intuitive: the list is already long as it is and the current system in place already does the job well in informing readers whether or not the information falls within the "Fictional world" category or the "Real world" category.— subtank   06:19, 17 August 2014 (EDT)

Proposal: Split Real World From In-universe
I've been wanting to mention this for a while but I kept forgetting. Anyways, I feel that the real-world years we use to list Halo releases should not be included on a template that was designed to list events by year within the Haloverse. We could create a separate template that lists each of the real-world years, or just merge all those articles into a single article like "List of Halo releases by year" or etc. It just seems a little confusing to have real-world events listed alongside in-universe events.-- 11:06, 4 September 2015 (EDT)


 * Agreed. I think we should just have a separate timeline for the real-world years. Always good to keep fiction and out-of-universe content separate. Here is Wookieepedia's template for reference, but we don't have nearly enough real-world years as they do. -- NightHammer (talk)(contribs) 11:20, 4 September 2015 (EDT)


 * With regard to Wookieepedia's format, they also don't have the unfortunate problem of their fictional years overlapping with real ones, which would mean we'd end up with pages with titles like "2004 (real-world)" if we want to include the canonical ILB and Iris material in their own fiction-centric year articles. 2021 will also face this issue in a few years. That said, I do support separating the timelines somehow, even if it means adding the "(real-world)" disambiguation to the titles that need it. --<font color="MidnightBlue">Jugus (<font color="Gray">Talk  | <font color="Gray">Contribs ) 03:39, 5 September 2015 (EDT)


 * How about an easier solution such as tagging each entry (i.e. the sentence at the end) with a visible notice informing readers that the entry is a real-world content and not part of the fictional Halo universe? In other words, we add an Appearance template but make it stand out like so: Real-world . It's easier to execute and to maintain. — subtank   11:46, 5 September 2015 (EDT)


 * Yeah, that could work. I was going to say creation separate sections for real-world and canon dates but, this might be an easier way. Plus, I doubt any canon dates will be placed in the upcoming real-life years now, as is the case with 2021. -- NightHammer (talk)(contribs) 11:59, 5 September 2015 (EDT)


 * An alternative yet still easy solution is to separate the current entries into two sections, Halo universe and Real-world events in a page, though the problem of doing so might result in sub-subheadings lumped closely to one another, making the page unsightly (especially in mobile view). Just a suggestion. :) — subtank   12:05, 5 September 2015 (EDT)


 * Creating two separate sections for each one would only work decently enough if we don't get too much canon dates in a year like 2016 for example. Otherwise, the page wouldn't look that great. -- NightHammer (talk)(contribs) 12:43, 5 September 2015 (EDT)