Thread:Shabook/@comment-26838855-20170830065356

Hi Shabook, I'd like to check in with you on a few things if you don't mind.

I know you have no interest in supposed timeline theories, but you have also said to come to you about queries regarding the editing of the wiki, and that is why I am here. You won't hear much from me for a while after this, and understanding some things better will help with that - I know this can be annoying for you, and for that I apologise. I am, admittedly, very nervous about this. Nice job with the events edits recently by the way. I try to keep up a bit with some edits being made to always learn. Here are my queries:

Thank you for your time, tolerance, and all you continue to do for this wiki. I continue to hope to be seen as a great help and not a hindrance, but I'd like to understand some things better (while I felt the whole "fanon dates" situation was pretty clear before, and have been trying to adhere to that, it has become clear to me now that there are different understandings and interpretations of it, for example), this is all in good faith for understanding the rules of the wiki as they update. And I really hope you are alright about Phase One, it would be a huge step.
 * 1) I quite like this idea of just removing dates from prose in articles where it's not particularly necessary. Just makes things easier in general, and I'll try to do that wherever I notice it. However, I do have a question about it. Something like an article talking about the Battle of Tønsberg being in 965 A.D., why is that a problem? A date which is shown on-screen and where no potential difficulties in the future would ever change that, it's completely canon and I don't really see why that's a problem. I don't mind it being removed, I'm just wondering why that, and other similar dates, have to also be removed when they're not speculation.
 * 2) This kind of edit I don't particularly understand, because the previous revision is clearer and more non-fanon. As good of a friend he is on the wiki to me, I do not follow Marvelous' edits that much and admittedly don't particularly appreciate his use of "We" sometimes when explaining himself, because he approaches the fanon thing differently to me, but I've been trying to enforce this non-fanon thing when I have time, and intend to do it more. I considered, at some point (though I'm very busy) trying to write a blog about the canonicity of dates to clear it all up and check it off with you. But yeah, the Joy Meachum thing, there's every possibility that she was born in 1991. The reference did not go into the theorising/speculation side of things about Harold's death having to be early 2004 and her saying she was 12 in her last summer with him etc. etc. etc. but, as you've requested before, was purely from a direct Marvel source: simply that Marvel released a video confirming Harold died in 2004, and that Rolling Thunder Cannon Punch had Joy saying she was 13 when he died. Therefore, with no speculative parts, she was born between January 2, 1990 and December 31, 1991. However, your edit means it now says that she was definitely born in 1990, which is not necessarily true, and that that information comes from Rolling Thunder Cannon Punch, which is not the full explanation and is not enough for the reader - it's the kind of thing where a user would post the question "How do we know Joy Meachum was born in 1990? The wiki just says it's in Rolling Thunder Cannon Punch, but I watched and scoured the episode and I couldn't find that." It's the same with Spider-Man, where someone might say "How do we know Spider-Man is 16? The wiki just says it's in Spider-Man: Homecoming, but he says he's 15 there." Is it that you dislike the "-"s in the DoBs? Because I'm curious to understand it, I'm always trying to get this all right and edits like that seem to go against what's been said before.
 * 3) I'd like to apologise over what you've said about events names being decided on timeline pages, just on behalf of that. I'm pretty sure I haven't done it more than a few times, but I'm sure I have done it a couple of times. I think whenever I've added events to timeline articles it's been the name from the episode's "Events" section or one with a seemingly obvious title, or, as you've corrected, on the draft page, part of the purpose of which was to make sure that mistakes don't get onto the actual page, but I guess redlinks are a problem. Is it that you would rather it wasn't linked or just events names weren't in there at all if they aren't already created/approved (though I don't know how that would be measured)?
 * 4) This is the main reason I am here. I feel like you might already be aware of this, but I felt despite you not being interested in the timeline, it was worth doing the courtesy of checking this with you, the boss - would you be OK with this? I feel like the last couple of years have shown that 2010 for Iron Man is just no longer feasible, and while I'm sure you do not have the time to read much of the blog, know that even the Marvel timeline file, showing the "years BIM" (eg. Schmidt taking the Tesseract, shown on-screen in the film as "March 1942" being "67 years BIM") overall puts "I am Iron Man" in late 2009, not 2010. There is also a lot of internal mistakes in dates in the current Phase One timeline that, regardless of the year, need fixing anyway. That blog fixes a large majority of it, neatens things up very nicely, and has full references throughout, plus would end a lot of the users saying "Iron Man shouldn't be 2010" so often. I've put a hell of a lot of time and effort into it and I'm very proud. I hope it also shows my commitment to the wiki and the standards as well. I also made the list of changes to ensure there is no messy transition.
 * 5) Do you have any thoughts about this? I know you don't have time for timeline theories and the like, but I was just curious about if you had any thoughts. I hope you agree, and your edit on Spider-Man implies you do, which is great to hear.
 * 6) While I'm asking about changes, I hope it's not too much to also just ask if you might be OK with this as well. If you only have the time or are only willing to permit one, I definitely feel that fixing Phase One is more important, but just if you feel happy about this as well. Totally cool if not.
 * 7) This kind of edit I also would just like some clarification over. I thought that only Netflix and other events orders were separate, but this suggests that the events orders for Daredevil: Season 2 and Luke Cage: Season 1 are separate, despite the timeline page showing how they are interwoven. Has there been a change of plan here?
 * 8) My last question is things like the edit removing the date from the Attack on Jeffrey Mace. That's one of the most solid dates in the MCU. In Deals with Our Devils, it is shown very clearly that Hope was born on April 18, 2006. In Wake Up, Mack says that it would be her birthday tomorrow, and that she died, aged 4 days, 11 years ago. So it's April 17, 2017, which lines up perfectly with all the evidence of timespans since Season 3 and Civil War (I won't bore you with the details). It also shows very clearly on-screen that the events of The Patriot were "yesterday". Why's a date not allowed there? I'm really not pushing against the fanon thing, I think it's a great idea for being informative, as well as being easier in the long run, but I wondered why you removed the date from that for example? It's just a little confusing.

Thank you very much, BEJT 