Editing Forum:Dates for articles
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
The discussion about what should be the base year for the wiki has [[Talk:Quar (world)|come up again]]. Based on [[Forum:Articles in time and place|many]], [[Forum:Proposal for Policy for article time|many]] long discussions the decision was made to make the base year for articles was 1115 (i.e. after the FFW, but before the start of the Rebellion). | The discussion about what should be the base year for the wiki has [[Talk:Quar (world)|come up again]]. Based on [[Forum:Articles in time and place|many]], [[Forum:Proposal for Policy for article time|many]] long discussions the decision was made to make the base year for articles was 1115 (i.e. after the FFW, but before the start of the Rebellion). | ||
− | The core problem here is the [[ | + | The core problem here is the [[Category: T5 Second Survey|T5SS]] is using the date of 1105, in other words before the [[Fifth Frontier War]]. As [[User: Garnfellow]] as attempted to update the articles in the [[Spinward Marches Sector]] the difference between the T5SS (now the "most official" standard) and the other data sources is causing difficulties. |
I am not interested in changing the base date for the wiki articles. I recommend leaving it at 1115. Mostly because most of the article (not just the UWP data) are written to or around that date. | I am not interested in changing the base date for the wiki articles. I recommend leaving it at 1115. Mostly because most of the article (not just the UWP data) are written to or around that date. |