Forgotten Realms Wiki talk:Sorting the years


 * Maybe two categories, one for "positive" and one for "negative"? A bit of a round-about way of doing it, I know, but just a suggestion :) Zerak talk 22:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that's quite a good solution. It wouldn't help the negative years to be in the correct order but it probably wouldn't matter because they wouldn't be mixed in with the positive years. Fw190a8 23:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. One could be "category: years before DR" then the other "category: years after DR". The only other organization method for sorting the years I can think of is by category of the age they are present in: "Age of the Proud Peoples", "Age of Humanity" and "Present Age" etc. Johnnyriot999 19:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

*Bump*
Anyone else chime in with their 2 cents? Zerak talk 19:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I have an added proposal on the project page. Johnnyriot999 21:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I've reworked the system and have a much simpler proposal up now. Johnnyriot999 21:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I dont think this system is overly complicated and will allow all the years to be placed in numerical order under one heading. I'm looking to implement this ASAP, if there are no objections. Johnnyriot999 21:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * That's simpler than falling off my chair. I'd like to second the proposal to use that system. As per the two week policy on proposals, we should probably leave it until 26th May to change this to policy, to give people the time to make alternate proposals or suggestions. Fw190a8 20:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm still in favor of having one category for "negative" years and one for years after -1 DR Zerak talk 21:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I dont want to seem curt, but may I ask why? Johnnyriot999 06:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It just seems the simpler approach to me - I think new users will have a hard time figuring out how they need to calculate the year - And what if we get years before -3500? And lastly, when looking through the category, trying to find the year you're looking for will be counter-intuitive. KISS Zerak talk 19:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * If I may adress these points one at a time. First of all, new users' first few edits are ALWAYS either categorized wrong or not at all (mine included) anyways and the regular editors put them in the right place, so I believe that points a bit of a non-issue. Secondly, I did consider that creating a hard point for the years would make it a rigid system, but I havent found a single reference to anything pre-35000 DR, most notable the Grand History of the Realms which is majoritorily going to be canonized later this year. Lastly, as for the ease-of-use, that is the whole reason I am proposing this. It would put all years within chronological order as opposed to the current system where the negative heading years go backwards and the positive ones are listed in correct order. To me that seems counter-intuitive and is why I've wracked my brain with multiple attempts to fix it. Johnnyriot999 21:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Are there any more thoughts on this proposal? Johnnyriot999 13:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorting Flaw
Someone posted this problem report (23018). I tested a little bit, and it seems that it fails to sort any years with a category number less than 10000. Anyone got an idea as to why? Zeraktalk 16:13, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The category sort key was wrong. The documentation on this article is correct, but it just wasn't followed for a few of the entries. I have corrected this where I saw it was in the wrong order! Fw190a8 (talk &middot; contr) 22:12, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

Template documentation

 * I did some editing to the Template:Yearbox to make documentation clearer. I'll do more work (anyone else can do it as well) Hurtzbad 03:07, September 5, 2009 (UTC)


 * Much appreciated. It's looking good! Fw190a8 (talk &middot; contr) 22:06, September 15, 2009 (UTC)