I'm doing a little revamp of the STO timeline. I already started with comprehensive articles on the 22nd Century and the 23rd Century. I will create articles on the 24th and 25th Century and update this article accordingly. This article will work as a hub on the centuries, giving brief descriptions of each. I plan to mainly include information on events that are also referenced in STO - I hope I succeeded so far.
I'm not entirely sure what to do with the articles on the individual years from the late 24th century. Personally I find them rather useful since the information is scattered. I'd rather include it in two comprehensive articles on both centuries, especially since not all the information from The Path to 2409 is that important to the overall STO timeline. The current entries for individual years should redirect to the main articles. Any thoughts on that? Or the articles in general? -- Backyardserenade 22:36, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Looks gread, good work so far. So, your plan is to include important bits of information in the century page, with links to the detailed Path page/year - do I get that right? -- Markonian 03:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- I do have another preposition. The timeline articles should become STOWiki's official articles on years and historic events. If a user enters "2387" they should be redirected to that article's summary in the 24th Century article (here).
- We should have another article "Path to 2409" where we can collect the official entries (probably like "Path to 2409/2387"). My reasoning: These articles contain copyrighted, unedited walls of texts about events in the respective year. While they are interesting (and tell a lot about the fate of some beloved characters), much of the information is not too relevant to actual STO lore. Plus (and that's my main argument) they are everything but accessible.
- I think the summaries in the century articles are a far better (and of course self-written) source of knowledge. And they allow for an easy lecture of past and following events. The "Path to 2409" article would be specifically mentioned in the Chronology article, which, as I said, will be the central hub for all timeline matters, once I'm finished.
- Lots of info, but I'd love your (and others') input. Does that make sense? Could we somehow mass move the current articles on years to redirect to the respective summaries? -- Backyardserenade 18:06, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- I think I understand your idea now. However, is it legal to include the unchanged "Path" text? Moreover, there are differences between the "Path" from the website and from The Needs of the Many' that need to be included on such a page. In spite of that, I consider your idea to make the chronology a hub okay as long as the "Path" remains somewhere in the Wiki. -- Markonian 18:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)