Gaming
 

Talk:Timeline (oWOD)

From the White Wolf Wiki, the most complete White Wolf reference

Contents

[edit] To Be Completed

[edit] Mage: The Ascension


[edit] Discussion

[edit] Let's get this started

Alright, now that we have a talk page set up, what needs work on the oWOD timeline? I've noticed there's not a lot of stuff for hunter: the reckoning, but that could be because of the lack of dates given in the books. --Shaoken 00:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

This is true, but also because BebopKate and I are the two most frequent users of the timeline. I'm a big fan of Mage, so I've mostly been putting Mage stuff in as I reference my Mage books. Kate does Wraith and Orpheus. I'm slowing working my way through my collection, but I'm still in the middle of Aberrant (which is on the top of four shelves).
Shouldn't stop you from getting started, if you like. See how Talk:Timeline (TU) is set up for keeping track of what's been done and what hasn't. What I do is I just flip through a book with Notepad open, and just transcribe all the dates I can, even if it's just a year, paired with the page the date appears on. Then I rearrange everything in Notepad into chronological order, and then update each year/article, one year at a time, flipping around through the book as needed.
That may not work best for you, but it's a starting point. --Ian 03:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay. I'll see what dates are given in the books. I guess I'll start with the events in the corebook, but since there isn't too many dates a lot of it will have to go on the year page. --Shaoken 03:23, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I think I've wrung all of the dates out of Orpheus I'm going to get, so unless anyone spots anything I missed, I would consider it complete. I'm going to have to do some backtracking on Wraith, though. BebopKate 19:52, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I've completed the story for the core-book of hunter: The reckoning. I'm planning on doing the Survival Guide next. --Shaoken 05:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dates

I can't figure out the system for individual dates. Could someone do it for me, or explain how only {{October 2}} can be on the edit page, yet it shows what happens in 2003?--Shaoken 06:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

October 2 will show all events that happened on October 2nd, no matter what the year. It's primarily of use on our front page, where it shows "today in White Wolf history." --Ian 15:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
I think I get it. Thanks.--Shaoken 22:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Too many years

I think there are too many single-year pages. I don't see a need for that except for the last two, three, four centuries at best. Checking the first 100 years after the birth of christ is simply painful, at the moment. I had to add the "40s" page because there were two almost-orphaned pages (years 43 and 49), and I found them only because on year 50 you get 49 as a previous year. I think we should begin to scrap individual year pages, bringin all events in the decade. And if the decade doesn't have at least a full page of events, then it gets scrapped too, and all the events fall back to the century. Look at millennium 5000 AD: http://whitewolf.wikia.com/wiki/5000m_BCE_(oWOD) we surely don't need a year-by-year breakdown on that. And neither on many of the first centuries.

I'm sorry to be so rough, I know someone put a lot for work simply in writing each page for each decade. But as far as I've seen, the timeline is almost unreadable at the moment.

All this to say: if no-one has anything agaist this, I'd like to start the work myself.

So, a rough guideline (to be discussed, obviously): if all the sub-pages of a category have less than ten entries each, the sub-categories are to be scrapped. (Check for duplicate entries, they don't count twice: I've seen the same entry about jesus at least 3 times.)

Humbly yours, --Vittek 13:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

You're right. I did almost all the work on the timeline pages myself, and it has been a lot of work. It will continue to be a lot of work. So I'm kind of resistant to your proposed changes (people can still find pages via Category:Timeline), but there is sense to them.
If no one else has any issues with your proposal and you're willing to do the work, go for it. Just make sure that all redirects and such (fr'ex, redirecting 31 (oWOD) to 30d (oWOD)) are accounted for. --Ian talk 18:09, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
First of all, remember that my kindness gets lost in translation. Second, if you don't agree I'm not gonna do anything. I know a wiki is a cooperative work and all that, but a work like this needs some kind of mastermind behind the curtain, if it has to go on for something like 4 years (I'm sure it's older, but that's the earliest date I can remember seeing just skimming through the wiki). I know because I had a site, and 2 years ago I turned it in a wiki, so I think I know what I'm talking about. But I digress.
You say people find page with the category. Well, I'm not searching anything, I just want to read all entries from oldest to newest. That seems actually worse if I use the category.
I think we agree on one thing: the conceptual breakdown in centuries, then in decades, then in years, does have a sense, a meaning, a purpose. Listing all 7000 years on a page, so that the user can choose the one he wants, is impractical. Plus, you can list events with only a rough time period on decade or century pages.
This way you have a tree. The problem arises when you have a leafless branch. When in a century you only need 2 years, you have 198 useless links. If events where equally spread, you could be sure that one day, you could use almost all of those pages. But as you know fully well, recent years are detalied down to month and day, but as you go back in the timeline, events get few and far between. So it is probable that many of those pages will never be filled with any event, because no handbook could contain 1500 events from 1000 BC to 500 AD.
Sorry if I write too much. So, are you ready to accept this? That you almost surely added too many pages? Ot would you prefer cutting off useless leafs only when all of the books will finally be compiled, at the cost of a descreased readability in the meantime? If your answer is 'keep them,' I'll understand.
As humbly as my english permits, --Vittek 19:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Like I said, go for it, if you think it'll make for a better Wiki. --Ian talk 20:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes, sorry but I think so. And I've just seen a wealth of orphaned timeline pages, like a hundred. This work really needs some loveful hands. It's late now, see you tomorrow! --Vittek 22:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Errors

I think this is a good place to list errors. 1) Removed the entry for the Solium Submergens in 31 AD - the one in 31 BCE was the right one. --Vittek 20:35, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

2) 57_(oWOD): Actually Claudius died in 54 AD, so Order of Hermes Tradition Book should be right. It remains to be seen why Dead Magic places Claudius' death in 57 AD. --Vittek 14:41, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://whitewolf.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Timeline_(oWOD)"