Talk: Timeline

I've added all events that happen a fixed number of days after the beginning of the game to the timeline. Ausir 12:29, 28 May 2005 (CEST)

New Plague outbreak problem - no date for this event at Denver design document.

• At the Quest section (page 65) - Recover Plague outbreak is journal entry: I found some evidence of a plague outbreak in Denver shortly before the War.
• War was beginned in 2066 (China invaded Alaska).

(more details: Sawyer (when interviewed by you) connected Denver outbreak with Black Ghosts, similar incursion was described at Hoover Dam design document).

I suggest to change a date for plague outbreak in Denver (2066 recommended, see: China) --dotz 14:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I remember a while ago there being certain other 'footnote' historical references (such as PotUS telling everyone to get fluffed about the Oil reserves, and a couple days later getting pwned by congress when he was impeached for jaywalking. Was there a de-flavouring of the page or a lack of credability for the refrences? --Frostedfire 02:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

The jaywalking part is still there: Timeline#2075. However, this is all from the Sierra Depot GNN Transcript holodisk, which was declared as non-canon by Chris Avellone, as it contradicted the official timeline (the person who wrote it for FO2 didn't bother checking it against the timeline from FO1 design documents), so the official word is that it was modified by bored SAD soldiers. Ausir 02:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Date of Enclave's discovery of Mariposa

In Fallout 2 President Richardson says the Enclave found Mariposa "about 70 years ago", which places its discovery in around 2172. 89.110.20.58 19:09, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Civil Rights

If I am correct, the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964. This means, that, in the Fallout time line, African Americans never received equal rights to whites. Is this addressed anywhere in any game? 69.235.46.104 00:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

It was not addressed in any game, but it certainly is possible (or maybe they did, but much later). Ausir 01:24, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

It seems to be an area of question, but I don't think it would matter anymore though. Anyone else have an interpenetration on this little conundrum? 69.235.46.104 06:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I always imagined that Civil Rights passed easily, maybe even probably before 1964. It would be a way to reasonably keep the 1950s society going, if African Americans have no reason to organize and protest, no reason to militarize to get rights, ect. then one part of the 1960s cultural revolution would have not have happened. 98.235.86.209 02:03, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Due to the facts that racial segregation is neither mentioned nor shown in the fallout universe, (Including few or no racist characters, no seperate bathrooms/drinking fountains/etc. for whites/blacks, no documentation of any civil rights movements, etc.) I believe that some time after Lincoln freed the slaves, blacks gained equal rights without the need for a seperate movement. JAG90 22:53, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

The timeline diverged after WW2, not in Lincoln's times. Ausir^(talk) 23:03, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

MacCready becoming mayor of Little Lamplight

Seems we have a bit of contradicting info here.

The official guide states: "He has served as the mayor of Little Lamplight for two years (since he was 10)" and as Fallout 3 starts in 2277 this would mean he became mayor in 2275. However, the timeline states he became mayor in 2274, citing his dialogue in the game. Can somebody verfiy the latter? // Porter21 ^{U | T} 21:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Looked it up, he indeed states he has been mayor for three years at the time of FO3 so I guess that's what canonical. // Porter21 ^{U | T} 21:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Yup, I generally consider the guide canon only when it doesn't contradict the game itself (since, while co-written by the devs, it's based on an early build of the game, and has some other mistakes here and there). Of course, it could also mean that McCready can't count properly. :) Ausir 21:52, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

That's pretty plausible Ausir. Seeing as how the only knowledge they have is from what they scavenge from outside, the old books, and what ever is passed down.--JimmyBassatti 21:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Game icons

Please don't add the game icons to the timeline. I was the one who started adding them a long time ago, but now I feel that they're cluttering the page too much and they're unnecessary - the references are enough. Also, why did you add {{Sources}} to the top of the article? Which facts do you think need verification? Adding it to the top of the timeline is not helpful, if you think some facts are wrong, just mention it on the talk page. Ausir 19:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

As it stands the Timeline is unclear. The canonicity of certain details are questionable or simply missing. Every single piece of information should be able to be referenced to a specific game or document; the {{Sources}} is the most applicable code I could find. Ugly references included in-timeline should be cleaned up with <ref></ref> codes. The mini icons are a convenient way to identify quickly which game or document each specific point derives from. This is helpful for those who are building mods or using it at as a reference and wish to discount Fallout Bible or Van Buren timeline references. ABCoLD 19:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

While there are elements of the Fallout Bible which are not considered canon (or at least not entirely), particularly Chris Avellone's Q&A sessions, the Fallout Bible timeline is based on Fallout 1 and 2 design documents, particularly on Scott Campbell and Brian Freyermuth's FO1 timeline and is definitely canon, referenced numerous times by Bethesda as well (and from what I gather from my discussions with the developers, they do consider it canon). There is no reason to discount it, since without it, there wouldn't even be a timeline page.

I guess we could add the icons for Van Buren and Fallout Tactics in order to indicate their non-canon or semi-canon status, but I'd leave the canon sources (including the FOB timeline) without any - only for sources for which we have canonicity warnings in other articles.

Any information that is not referenced is most likely from the Fallout Bible timeline. Ausir 19:24, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

That's fine. I would like to leave the {{Sources}} in place though until each entry in the timeline has an appropriate <ref></ref> code. Otherwise it's difficult for new people, or those not fully versed in every facet of Fallout, to be confused as to the source of various claims or statements. ABCoLD 19:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the {{Cleanup}} tag I added is more appropriate. Ausir 19:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Thirteen commonwealths

The thing about the division of the country into thirteen commonwealths is something that Leon Boyarsky came up during the development of FO1 and what was behind the idea of the original picture with the flag, so I restored it and changed the ref accordingly. I kept your change of 14 stars to 13 stars, since, while based on a mistake that Chris Avellone made by JE Sawyer and Tramell Isaac later corrected, I guess it is the only version of the flag seen fully in a game, so it's canon now. Still consistent with 13 commonwealths, though, as the middle flag might stand for the Columbia commonwealth that includes the nation's capital. Ausir 23:11, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't dispute that 13 commonwealths existed, or anything of that sort. I was simply pointing out that the fact that 13 stars are on the flag doesn't mean that there are 13 superstates. It's like stating that because we have three types of Whopper Hamburgers that there are X number of cows. I'd prefer it if the confusion about superstates be kept on the United States page. As it is the timeline seems to mistakenly suggest that the existence of the 13 superstates was definitively proven in the exhibit. (As it stands Bethesda could simply decide that the nation liked the Cowpens flag enough to continue to use it. This seems to be the case, but again is a matter of discussion for the United States page. :) ABCoLD 23:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

The timeline diverged some time after WW2, so they couldn't have "continued to use" the Cowpens flag. And Leon Boyarsky did say that the flag was changed because of the reorganization of the country into 13 superstates. I don't see why the flag would be changed first and country reorganized to match it second.

This is not canon, of course, but I tend to think that Richard Nixon won the 1960 election in the Fallout universe and was the one to reorganize the country. Would have been pretty funny to see a big Nixon Memorial in Washington, DC in FO3. :) Ausir 23:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Ausir is right. The Thirteen Commonwealths approach has been STATED by a FALLOUT DEVELOPER to be the one they used when creating the USA in the Fallout world. Your doubts are irrelevant - the devs have spoken, and this is the way it is. Shaur M. S. Grizlin 23:41, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Admittedly, the 13-star flag being used in the Museum of Technology could have simply been a mistake by the designers, who intended to have the commonwealths and new flag introduced later but forgot to make the Virgo II flag a 50-star one, and just used the only US flag texture they had. I'd assume that it's not a mistake for now, but I'll check with the devs to be sure. Ausir 23:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

References and notes

R & N section is messed up...--Cc123 05:40, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

---

2272: Three Dog starts GNR. Is there any concrete evidence to this? All he says is that "even if you disregarded everything I said in the past five years" and that could mean anything; since he's talking about the Enclave, it could mark that he started preaching anti-Eden propaganda in that year.--Amitakartok 20:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Outcasts

uhm, something random here i've seen that after talking to some of the people from the citadel in fallout 3 (namely scribe bowditch) that the outcasts left the capital wasteland brotherhood of steel at 2276 so maybe someone can like put it in the timeline if they want 67.122.137.53 01:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)--67.122.137.53 01:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

thats the 17th century...

seriously someone needs to change that. 1697 is not the 15th century, its the 17th. i tried editing it but the page is locked -Snufleufugus

Thanks

Amata

I do not think Amata was born in the same year like the player char. On his 10th birthday she still was 9 or younger because she did not wear a pip boy.

On the other hand, isn't it mentioned that they've been friends since they were born? And do I remember completely wrong when I say that some of the others at Vault Dweller's age doesn't have a Pip-Boy either? -=KAG=-^{The VaultNO} 01:21, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Just because she was younger than the LW doesn't mean she wasn't born in the same year. She could simply be a few months younger. Ausir^(talk) 01:28, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Ausir is right! the timeline says that amata was born in the same year as the lone wanderer, however the order puts amata's birth after the lone wanderer's. therefore, amata would be 9 on the lone wanderer's 10th birthday. Wrpen-99 13:29, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

Birthdates

What do you guys think about removing birthdates of minor characters, and leaving only the most important ones? They just clutter the page. Ausir^(talk) 01:26, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Make a separate page linked to from the bottom: Birthdates. Wouldn't hurt. _Tagaziel ^(call!) 08:01, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Point of Divergence

Waaaaaait wait wait wait. Mothership Zeta added a new thing into the Fallout universe that was BEFORE the divergence yet didn't happen in OUR world. Andrew Endicott should exist in our world too, and he should at least supposedly be abducted, or otherwise "disappear". This kind of screws up the whole Divergence thing... But I like the divergence! It adds a new dimension to Fallout... Domn-117 18:17, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

It's a bit of a stretch to think that every missing person from the 17th century would be known today. Deadlykris 02:50, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

"End" of Fallout 3/Broken Steel

Where do we set the mark when Fallout 3 and/or Broken Steel end? I know it's open-ended and may take any amount of time, but as far as I know it's the same for FO2. How was that end point determined? -- Porter21 ^(talk) 11:56, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

The end point for Fallout 2 was given by Chris Avellone in the Fallout Bible. So we won't have a similar date for Fallout 3 unless Bethesda gives us one. Ausir^(talk) 14:33, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Well, I guess we could still give an estimated end (like the one for FOT). It just looks weird having the start in the timeline but no end; maybe that's just me though ;) Maybe we could hold a poll in the next Weekly Digest on which ingame date people finished all add-ons and the main quest? Not sure about including Point Lookout though, it heavily distorts the end time because a single journey to Point Lookout (or from Point Lookout to the Capital Wasteland) takes a whole month of ingame time. -- Porter21 ^(talk) 17:13, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

We do have an entry for the end of FO3 under 2277. I suppose it would be better to move it to 2278 and add a note that it's an estimated date. Ausir^(talk) 17:35, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I missed it because it wasn't bold like the other game start/end dates. 2278 seems more likely to me; none of my games ended in 2277. -- Porter21 ^(talk) 17:43, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

actually, there is no way of knowing when the game ends take place. fallout 3's end could take place as far as (and farther than) 2080, if the player waits long enough. broken steel could likewise end in the same year! this all depends on how long the player waits. Wrpen-99 13:33, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

Great War

I've realized that the clocks in FO3 may all have the same time set on them, and if they do, I think that it may be safe to say that the world was nuked at approx. that time. If not, then simply forget it.--Master of cheeZ 21:26, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Harold and Oasis

I was reading through and came across a problem and I'm not sure if I'm reading it wrong or if it's wrong.

According to the timeline Harold did not appear in the Capitol Wastes until 2277, dispite saying he's been stuck in the ground for decades and Three Dog saying he saw the Oasis years ago.

Also according to the timeline Bloomseer Poplar arrived in the Oasis in 2252, 25 years before Harold arrived there.

Point of Divergence Theory

Much of what I've read about the Fallout series timeline states that the point of divergence is sometime after World War II. The first thing that comes to my mind when pondering the topic is the actual historical occurrence of the atom bombs dropped on Japan at WWII's climax. It got me thinking. I have not read or seen where the Fallout series mentions those bombs being dropped specifically. I have concluded and believe that the exact moment of divergence is the dropping of the "little boy" atomic bomb on Hiroshima. According to the Fallout mythos and more specifically the Children of Atom doctrine, when an atom bomb is detonated it creates an entirely new universe full of life. If this were the case, then when "little boy" was detonated it could've split the timeline into the two diverging ones, our own and the fallout timeline, where "fat man" was never dropped on Nagasaki but instead developed into a personal nuclear weapon. Continuing with this logic, would mean that every nuclear bomb dropped during the "Great War" would also create divergent timelines, this could account for the minor differences made by the player within each Fallout game. --Truesdmj 17:21, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

As with any thoery, it's mostly just your own personal speculations. The theory must be supported by game evidence to be accepted. The fact that the atomic bomb drops on Japan in WWII were never mentioned in any Fallout doesn't mean that they didn't occur. It might have just never came up by any character to mention that. Or, since the game takes place so many years post-Great War, new generations of people were born and live in desolete wastelands; they simply might not have read any history books at all, i.e. are not educated about this historical event, plus all they care nowadays is avoiding the next raider attack. ;) Plus, the Children of the Atom are just some dulusional religious crazies, you can't take any of their theories for granted. We don't really know if there was no "Fat Man" nuclear bomb. Maybe the mini-nuke launcher was named in honor of it? Aren't you talking LOST here with all its "drop a nuke, create an alternate timeline" stuff? ;) --TheBearPaw 23:39, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Hiroshima bomb is mentioned in Fallout 3. " I am fully confident that the presence of Liberty Prime at the Anchorage Front line will be to the Chinese what the Hiroshima bomb was to the Japanese in 1945. " Ausir^(talk) 00:58, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Heh... I actually wasn't thinking about "Lost" when I came up with this theory. But as I stated it's just a theory that makes sense to me, I wasn't trying to make anyone accept it. Now if the Nagasaki bombing will be mentioned in any future games then my theory is debunked, but until then I like the idea of it.Truesdmj 20:18, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Canonicity

I noticed some additions to the timeline based on non-released content, for example Fallout: Resource Wars - like this. I believe this "Timeline" article should list only the canonic events, right? All the scrapped or unfulfilled ideas are pretty much meaninglesss and threaten the integrity of the article. What d'ya say? --TheBearPaw 10:37, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, unlike Van Buren, F:RW was never more than a hypothetical project, so it shouldn't be there. Ausir^(talk) 09:21, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

Revisions and Corrections

Why is this page protected form all editing? It needs some serious grammar checking, general improvement of the writing, and removal of redundancies and irrelevant information. DrMorbius 01:44, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

Van Buren?

Why is there so much Van Buren info on the page? Isn't it all non-canon, and contradicted by Fallout 3 and New Vegas? Revolverman 06:32, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

It's not considered fully canon, but it has been referenced in both Fallout 3 and New Vegas and so far it hasn't been contradicted in any way. Ausir^(talk) 09:21, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

Contradictions

• There are two instances of there being a last manned mission to the moon, one in 2020 and another in 2052. Which is correct?

• The 1945 discription states that the Fallout timeline diverges at this point. It may have been correct considering the time the Fallout bible was written at, but the later Fallout games changed this. Maybe state that there timeline began to diverge in ernest rather than stating that this is point where it began to diverge as this is plainly untrue.

2228

"The ghouls of Capital Wasteland are driven underground by hostile mutants and humans, forming the Underworld in the Museum of History" I thought a group of ghouls took refuge there and started the ghoulification process and then it just became a home to ghouls. 86.12.86.254 15:42, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

Ghouls being Ghoulified? De Accipitre Deserta 21:30, November 2, 2010 (UTC)

2277

It says that this is when the Vault Dweller was sent out, except that happened way before fallout 3 started. Am I just overlooking something here or what?

2277 is when Vault 13 was originally scheduled to open in the Vault Experiment. Ausir^(talk) 21:19, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

Closing of US borders

According to the GURPS timeline, the US closed its borders in 2052 for unspecified reasons, but then FO1 and the Fallout Bible contradict that by stating that the borders are closed again in 2053 to quarantine the New Plague. Should the 2052 entry be removed? Nitty ^Tok. 01:01, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Eh, forget all you guys. I've removed the GURPS date in favour of the F1 and Bible date. Nitty ^Tok. 03:41, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

9:49:10 PDT

This is the time all clocks in Capital Wasteland are locked at, if you look closely on some of the clocks that appears in the buildings.

I guess this is the time the bombs struck DC area, 2 minutes after the first bomb (in east coast 10:47 PDT+1)

Some clocks ingame marks 2 or 3 seconds after.

As we know, one side effect of a nuclear blast is stopping all clocks at the time, just like it happened in Hiroshima, so this should be noted, by putting a note First Bomb: 10:47 PDT+1 at the 2077 section.Wertoret 15:04, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

Why would the Capital Wasteland's clocks be set to Pacific Daylight Time? They'd be set to Eastern Standard Time at that time of the year; the change that expanded DST in our universe isn't known to have happened in the Fallout universe. --Kris 15:30, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

2208

it's a cycle of "mourning", not of morning.

Not sure why you thought it was easier to comment on it here rather than fix it. At any rate I took care of it. --Kris 15:11, November 8, 2010 (UTC)

Ian and Dogmeat die during the course of Fallout 1?

Er, the time table says that Ian and Dogmeat died during the course of Fallout 1, but aren't they still alive in Fallout 2?

Ian was planned to appear in FO2, but was eventually cut from the final version. And Dogmeat's appearance in the special encounter in FO2 is an easter egg, not a canon appearance. Ausir^(talk) 12:23, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

Which Commentarii?

• Begin history nerd speech here* Julius Caesar wrote two books named 'Commentarii', one was about the Gallic wars and the other was about the Roman Civil War. /endnerdspeech. Does the source (I assume the guidebook), say which one. Or do I know more about history than Prima does :) FinalWish 19:06, November 27, 2010 (UTC)

Garbage

This article is complete garbage, shouldn't there be some mention of some sort of apocalyptic event in the 60's? You know the event that stopped culture from progressing and therefore left the fallout world permanently in the 1960's? i.e still listening to Frank Sinatra ect....?!!?!

I'd always assumed it probably started with the U.S. either winning the Vietnam War, or brutally crushing the counterculture movement on the homefront. --GaussRifle 19:33, December 31, 2010 (UTC)

Berlin wall

In are universe it came down in 1989 but what about the Fallout universe --Owen1983 19:25, December 31, 2010 (UTC)

It might not have even been built. Evidence suggests that the U.S. and Soviet Union had a decent relationship after the war, and the universe had already significantly diverged by 1961 (When the wall went up). --GaussRifle 19:35, December 31, 2010 (UTC)

Fallout New Vegas Companions births

We should include the birth of the companions of Fallout New Vegas in the timeline.

Ausir's revert

I don't know if you've looked at the diff, but the changes to the article are possibly more substantial than you realised, and despite any perceived flaws, produce a net improvement. Additionally, while it is simple to add the removed paragraph from the top and cite things like information that was previously uncited and remove information that contradicts canon, it requires far more work to make the changes again minus said information, as it took at least a couple of hours before. The perceived problems could have been rectified without a destructive revert. The main changes were as follows:

• Greatly shortened the opening section, because as I explained on Gothemasticator's talk page, there is a lengthy references section, and the listed sources no longer adequately describe where the bulk of the article's information came from. To list all of the sources would obviously be impractical, that's why the references section exists.
• Made the formatting of all the dates uniform. This include making known dates bold, and moving undated events to the top of their year's section above the dated events (with a few exceptions, such as undated events which were known to take place sometime after dated events).
• Spaced each entry evenly, making not much difference to the end user but making the article a lot easier to follow for editors.
• Removed some entries which were endings of FO1 and FO2 that had not been confirmed by later canon sources (or even contradicted).
• Added a lot of wikilinks to articles that were unlinked, and removed overlinking.
• Added dates from the Jericho, Burham Springs, B.O.M.B.-001 and New Canaan documents, as well as misc. other dates from other design documents which for whatever reason were not cited.
• Added FO1 and FO2 endings that had been confirmed by canon sources (as noted in the games' ending articles).

And about the Jericho dates, I thought the whole point of the Van Buren icon was to denote that the information is from VB and therefore not necessarily canon. As long as that is noted, what is the problem with including the event? You could even put a note on the Jericho citation saying how it contradicts canon, which IMO would be better than removing it outright. I would be happy to address any concerns with the article, but I firmly believe that the changes were overall positive. The article as it currently stands has far more issues, imo, than my revision - I wouldn't have made the edits in the first place had I not thought that. --Flower of Pock-Lips 17:54, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

Dates from Van Buren and other non-canon sources are to be included in the timeline only if they do not contradict canon sources (otherwise we'd also have two dates for things like the founding of Caesar's Legion etc.). The New Canaan and Jericho design documents are entirely contradictory to each other, as New Canaan was merged into Jericho during late development stages because of time constraints. Including information from both of them on the same timeline would be utterly confusing to the readers, especially given that you did not even include references for the Jericho additions. Since we know that New Canaan still exists by 2281 from New Vegas, we can entirely discard the Jericho document as contradictory to canon. J.E. Sawyer obviously considers his own pre-merge New Canaan document to be the canon history of that town.

Furthermore, I decided to exclude some of the Van Buren events (such as quite a few of the Burham Springs ones) from this timeline altogether because they were not relevant enough to anything other than their own locations in a canceled game. This timeline is already rather lengthy and I think such trimming was necessary (just like the removal of most of the birthdates from the main timeline). Perhaps it would be a good idea to create a separate Van Buren timeline page, which would include even events contradicted or changed in New Vegas (although even then I'd exclude Jericho design document and include the New Canaan one).

The opening section is there for a reason. There is a difference between indicating references and indicating origin. This timeline is originally based on Chris Avellone's timeline, which was the first attempt to create a coherent timeline of events in the Fallout universe since early stages of development of the first game, and it's in turn based on the Campbell/Freyermuth original timeline. This is independent from references for individual events - it is meant to describe the behind the scenes history of the compilation of this timeline. Even for timeline entries copied directly from the Fallout Bible, we often don't cite it as such, as citations to in-game mentions are preferred. In normal articles, such information would be placed in a "Behind the scenes" section below the main content, but in this case I think it should stay at the top. But it definitely should not be removed.

As I said before, before such major rewrites or important articles like this one or the one at Harold, you should have discussed it on the talk page or forum first. This is a wiki, but some changes have big enough impact to be discussed first before you actually undertake them. Ausir^(talk) 18:12, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

Ugh, I really really hate the bolding of content text, even for know dates. I also hate long intros just as much, they should be short sweet and to the point on the subject and nothing more. What one person might find of interest, another may not and the intro will most likely always be read by the viewer as they are perceived as being vital information, but more often is the case that it isnt. I would suggest the shorten intro followed by a origins section appropriately title, that way the reader will know what the information is about and can make the choice to read it. On a side note I have replaced all the VB icon with the proper {{icon}} template. ☣Avatar☣ 05:42, February 20, 2011 (UTC)

I don't have much of a preference for or against bolding of dates. As for the intro, I don't mind it being moved to a separate section, I only object to it being removed altogether. As for {{icon}}, perhaps also add a tooltip indicating the uncertain canon status? Ausir^(talk) 16:23, February 20, 2011 (UTC)

I've created a draft page at User:Flower of Pock-Lips/Timeline. Let me know what you think of it. --Flower of Pock-Lips 16:25, February 20, 2011 (UTC)

Ausir, thats why I replaced all the icons that where using [[File:xxx.xxx]] with {{icon}}, as that has tool tips that says what VB icon is (a lot of readers don't know). As for canonicity, that really needs to be done with {{VB}} and kinda negates the use of the icons. The only thing I can think of, is if Porter wants to put and switch in {{VB}} that allows only the icon showing with the text being moved to a tool tip. Flowers, do we really need images on a timeline. The timeline should really be providing a very brief description of the event and a link to the page. 21:53, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

I'm ambivalent about the images. I just thought they would be nice to illustrate the more major events. It's the other changes that I'm more concerned about keeping everyone happy with, I don't want to step on any toes. --Flower of Pock-Lips 13:08, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Problem with images is that once you start to add them, then everyone does. Considering the amount of information contained in this page, the page is going to get cluttered pretty quick and actually detract from the information within. The other concern is formatting for both skins as well as in general, images will push the next one down and no longer be connected to what they represent. Other than that, looks pretty good although I would personally cut down some of the information. Some of it is far to descriptive of the event, at the end of the day this really should be viewed as a index of events and provide the basic information and links to more detailed information. 03:17, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. I also think it's best not to include images in the timeline. As for icon tooltip, I was thinking of something like this: Ausir^(talk) 03:25, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

Ohhhhhhhh K, so when did someone sneak in the link feature *stares at Porter*. Yeah that works fine for me, I have added it in. 04:08, February 24, 2011 (UTC)