Talk:Timeline

Canon vs. Canon-in-Training

Because this article is in the Canon category, and because canon-in-training information is still subject to change, I propose to put all of the canon-in-training entries in bold. Obviously nearly all the dates are known only through Ask Greg, and they are all formatted in bold anyhow. I'm only interested in bolding entries for events which are not shown or referred to in canon, or (such as the timing of Nokkar's arrival) for which the date is not so much as hinted in the canon. If nobody objects to this, I will start in a week or so. Vaevictis Asmadi 18:46, 24 July 2007 (CDT)

If nobody thinks its a bad idea, I plan to start bolding the C-i-T in the Timeline in a few days. I intend to leave known historical events as "canon" since they probably aren't subject to change. -- Vaevictis Asmadi 10:45, 19 August 2007 (CDT)

A.D or C.E?

I suppose it's theoretically possible that I once used BCE and CE in some specific context, but I almost exclusively use BC and AD. Certainly, my own timeline uses BC and AD. Where did you get the idea that I preffered BCE and CE? - gdw

I was making an inference based on one of your rambles where you discuss the timeline you wrote. The ramble in question is here. I figured since you wrote "from 9386 B.C.E." that was the convention you were using for your written version of the timeline. I suppose I was incorrect in making that deduction?--Moeen 09:46, 19 August 2007 (CDT)

Alright, next time somebody decides to re-format the whole wiki without asking first, I'm going to let somebody else standardise everything.

So Greg, which convention DO you prefer, or which do you prefer we use here? -- Vaevictis Asmadi 10:45, 19 August 2007 (CDT)