Ta-da, well its abit confusing I think but this should function as a single timeline and publication navigation box, rather than the multiple boxes many pages currently have. Novels, comics, episodes, movies, etc should all be doable and various timelines can also be displayed. -- 8of5 20:39, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

First of all, 8of5 deserves a ton of credit for this. I know not everyone cares, but I love these timelines at the bottom of pages - and I like seeing both publishing and chronological order. Anyway, I was trying to add a third "voyages of" section so I could use it for the A Time for War, A Time for Peace page and I think I did it right by simply repeated everything from the 'voyages2' section and replacing the appropriate 2s by 3s. It appears to work as expected, but there is still a tiny bit of a snag which I don't know how to fix. Currently, if you enter "other" after "Voyages1" you then have to enter something in another "other" line which has no special number after it. If you are forced to do that twice you have a problem. If you use "other" for both voyages1 and voyages2 then it takes the second "other" as overriding and uses it for both sections. If you try something like "other2" for the second section, it ignores it and so reuses the first "other". Get it? It is hard to explain, but try to use two non-templated ships for two seperate voyages listings and you will see what I mean. I simply don't know how to fix this. Jdvelasc 06:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I think I know how to fix it, but I'm quite tired and don't fancy trying right now. In the mean time what are the extra things you want to add? Might they be ones useful to add to the templated list anyway? -- 8of5 07:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Had a look at what you're trying to do and found a nice simple solution. There is now an optional field called voyagessub# (#=1,2 or 3) which will place a subdivide under the useual templated voyages of selection. -- 8of5 07:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Dixon and Trowbridge[edit source]

Both these timelines are getting quite out of date and Geoff Trowbridge is a contributor to the Pocket Timeline. Given that and the huge amount of other information this template can hold I think it might be time to remove these two. The Pocket Timeline and our own chronology are both much more up to date. Thoughts? --8of5 19:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree that Dixon and Trowbridge should be removed. I am a big fan of timelines, but as we add more and more extra things to the Memory Beta chronology having both the pocket books and MB timelines on a page should be plenty. By the way, I have always wondered if there is a good place to discuss timeline issues - for example, the doctor has mentioned he is unhappy with several placements in the pocket books timeline. Before changing them on the MB timeline, it might be nice to know why he thinks so, etc. I also have a few issues with some of the pocket placements. Group discussions would be ideal. Obviously, this goes for placing comics and new works as well. Are there well-known discussion places such as on the Trek BBS? Or should we just set up our on on-going forum to discuss placement issues? Right now what happens (at best) is that somebody just puts something on the timeline and someone else asks on the talk page if they are bold enough and care enough. --Jdvelasc 15:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest discussion about placements on the chronology take place on the main chronology talk page, the specific section of the chronology effected talk page, or the talk page of the novel, comic, etc, in question. When I add placements if the placement is obvious I just add it, if it's a bit speculative I make what I think is the best place, and if I'm really worried about it, say so on a talk page and hope someone else pays attention. If you have a problem with a placement you should definitely bring it up on a talk page, be bold and care! Don't be afraid of stepping on someone’s toes, if something is done wrong it's better to point it out, risking annoying someone a little, than to let it continue to be a problem. --8of5 06:40, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree that the Dixon and Trowbridge (especially Dixon) timelines should be removed for the same reason that I think that we should stick to the published Pocket timeline. It is a licensed resource and the other two are not. If we start making our own decisions on novel placement, does that not violate fan-fiction restrictions? --Turtletrekker 05:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
ETA: Also-- we have a link to the Trowbridge timeline on Geoff's page here. That should suffice. --Turtletrekker 05:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree on removing the Trowbridge and Dixon timelines from the timeline template as they have now become obsolete, and besides the Pocket timeline basically follows the Trowbridge timeline anyway. And with regards to our deciding the placement of stories going against fan-fiction restrictions, I completely disagree. If someone petitions for an entry to be moved to another point than stipulated in the Pocket timeline, as I did with the entry for The Disinherited, then that petition is based from information established in the book itself, i.e. that Chekov was a rookie on bridge duty and was out to prove himself, suggesting placement between Seasons 1 & 2, instead of before "The Gamesters of Triskelion". So any movement from the standard is readily discussed before it takes place, and is after all is taken from licensed media.
Besides that, the addition of the latest novels, as well as the comics, computer games, RPG references, all have to be added to the timeline as the official Pocket timeline doesn't (yet) cover them. I'm sure when another updated timeline comes along in another 5 years with comic references then we can change the entries accordingly, but at the moment we are striving for completion for every new story that comes out by adding it to the timeline. We can do instantaneously, Pocket Books and the Timeliners can't. --Dr. John Smith 08:44, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree we should try and keep adjustments to the Pocket placements as limited as possible as they are the official dates as it were. But if there is a strong case for moving something then I think it's justifiable. We should make sure the notes section on the chronology and information section on the story involved highlights the move and explains the reasons though. --8of5 12:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Same template (sort of), new method[edit source]

This template has never been the easiest to use, and it's only gotten worse as it's evolved, plus I've noticed there are a few pages, such as The Buried Age and Pathways where there are so many additional timeframes that even all the existing optional fields on this template can't handle them. So I have a devised a new simplified form of this template, rather than having everything on a single template with a myriad of optional fields I've split it up, there are three header sections and five different now/next sections which can be inserted to have as few or as many as required, like this:

  • Production order
    • series release order
    • author release order
  • Chronological order
    • MB chronology
    • Pocket timeline
  • Additional chronological placements
    • additional chronological placement

So rather than the current hidden extra fields for when we have two authors, or the book is part of two or three different series, or there are thirteen additional timeframes, now there is just a one template for each sort of thing, which can repeated as many times as needed.

I've also removed a few optional fields as they seemed to just make the whole thing overly complex, so hopefully it should be easier to fill in now as well.

The design is otherwise the same as this template so we won't need to make changes to every media page to include it, just add and replace as we edit and create new pages and eventually the old template will be edited out of use. I’ve made a version showing it in use with random info on the sandbox page. What do you think? --8of5 15:42, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.