Talk:Timeline of canon media

TCW comics
I have a question: Star Wars: The Clone Wars (graphic novellas) and the Star Wars Comic UK Clone wars Volume 5-7-...) are considered canon? Because they all output during the Clone Wars and is technically not contradise between with.
 * Everything that is not listed here is either non-canon, or has yet to be commented upon by officials. --Imperialles 10:57, May 2, 2014 (UTC)

Darth Maul Shadow Conspiracy
Shouldn't The Clone Wars: Darth Maul: Shadow Conspiracy be removed from the list? The twitter post it uses as a source says that Darth Maul&mdash;Son of Dathomir is canon and doesn't say if Shadow Conspiracy is canon or not. DarthRevan1173 (Long live Lord Revan) 02:48, May 3, 2014 (UTC)
 * Although my area of expertise is Legends books and short stories, I havent heard anything indicating that Shadow Conspiracy is Canon. It may be "based" on episodes of TCW, but there are differences between the book and the episodes. Therefore until we hear otherwise it does not belong on this list. --ExarKunLives (talk) 04:00, May 3, 2014 (UTC)

Ezra's Gamble - Source?
Isn't SW: A New Dawn supposed to be the first canon novel? Where was it stated that this one is canon? Patsoumas1995 (talk) 17:03, May 4, 2014 (UTC) OK, so shouldn't the rest of the Rebels tie-ins be added in the timeline? Patsoumas1995 (talk) 18:49, May 4, 2014 (UTC)
 * AS posted on Star Wars Books Facebook page. "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…. STAR WARS: A NEW DAWN by John Jackson Miller. Our very first official canon novel set solidly in the legendary "Dark Times" between Episodes III and IV, A NEW DAWN will introduce readers to two main characters from the upcoming Star Wars: Rebels animated series—Kanan Jarrus and Hera Syndulla—and will feature jacket art by Doug Wheatley, as well as a foreword by Dave Filoni, one of the executive producers of The Clone Wars and Star Wars: Rebels. It goes on sale September 2, 2014. Head over to StarWars.com for the official announcement from Lucasfilm about the legacy of the Expanded Universe and its place as the newly-branded Star Wars: Legends line. And keep checking our Facebook page throughout the day for more exciting news. "--ExarKunLives (talk) 18:29, May 4, 2014 (UTC)
 * It's part of the Rebels metaseries, which is canon. Cade  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg  Calrayn  17:06, May 4, 2014 (UTC)
 * But wouldn't the TCW tie-ins, which are confirmed to be non-canon, fall in the same category then? Patsoumas1995 (talk) 17:36, May 4, 2014 (UTC)
 * Nothing released prior to the anouncement linked above is part of the new canon. --ExarKunLives (talk) 18:29, May 4, 2014 (UTC)

The movies' novelizations: canon, but "not too much"
We have to be cautious about the movie novelizations, it seems. We'll have to remember that Del Rey posted this on Twitter 15 days ago: "To clarify, movie novelizations are canon where they align with what is seen on screen in the 6 films and the Clone Wars animated movie." In other words, they're not really canon after all. That probably means anything that isn't seen/mentioned in the film isn't canon either. -- Lelal Mekha  (Audience Room) 20:32, May 14, 2014 (UTC) So, I was originally in the same group with you (only what is shown on screen is canon), but after paying attention to the whole situation, it seems that we are wrong: Del Ray state that the novels are canon, then everyone on the comments went "So that means Owen & Obi-Wan being brothers are canon!". It was after multiple comments that jokingly claimed that inconsistences such as this were now canon that made Del Ray say that only what alligns with what's on screen is canon. So, it sounds more like that the contradictions in the novels are non-canon, not everything novel-exclusive is non-canon. Thoughts? Should we add the novels? Patsoumas1995 (talk) 20:50, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * Correct. It would be better to add a little qualifying note next to each novelization clarifying this. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 20:34, May 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * However... that's a pretty pointless official statement, is it not? -- Lelal Mekha  Old Republic military symbol.svg(Audience Room) 20:40, May 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it basically means they aren't canon at all. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 20:41, May 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * I really don't understand where they're going with statements like that. It doesn't even let us keep harmless pieces of background information that do not even contradict the movies, things like Luke Skywalker's dog or the walking barnacles of Alderaan. -- Lelal Mekha  Old Republic military symbol.svg(Audience Room) 20:42, May 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * Patsoumas, it was decided already by a community vote that the statement indicated that we should not treat novelizations as canon. Corellian Premier Jedi symbol.svg Force will be with you always 21:09, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

TCW years 22-19 BBY
I have reason to believe that the dates for The Clone Wars go like this: Cat and Mouse to The Zillo Beast Strikes Back is 22 BBY. Senate Spy to Hostage Crisis is 21 BBY. Heroes on Both Sides to The Wrong Jedi is 20 BBY. The Lost Missions and Son of Dathomir is 19 BBY. I get the dates from Padme stating that Anakin had been away from Coruscant for an extended amount of time in Senate Spy despite The Zillo Beast Strikes Back right before it chronologically. In Heroes on Both Sides, we see the change in appearance for Anakin, Obi-Wan and Ahsoka. Finally the information learned in The Lost Missions (such as the knowledge that Dooku was Tyranus) is not known in the first 13 chapters of Labyrinth of Evil. I'd like to change that after I get approval so long as it is not too speculative. Have a dark side-filled day! --DarthZac14 (talk) 21:45, May 14, 2014 (UTC)

Star Wars Journeys Canonicity
Is there anything that has confirmed that Star Wars Journeys is canon? It's been released in the gray area period before any other new canon has come out, so I'm not certain that it is to be considered canon. Tainb&#39;ocu&#39;chulainn (talk) 13:20, May 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * Its an exact adaptation of the film, for one. Secondly, Lucasfilm has stated that all games released after the EU "reboot" are canon. Dentface (talk) 16:28, June 28, 2014 (UTC)

Galactic Standard Calendar
The Galactic Standard Calendar is no longer canon, but we're using it here for our timeline. Should we be? ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:10, May 30, 2014 (UTC)
 * I was wondering the same thing. The seven films still have the year they take place, and Rebels still says it takes place five years before A New Hope. Did they decide to keep the calender, or should we remove the years?173.89.43.12 01:01, August 1, 2014 (UTC)
 * I say we play it safe and remove the years. The Lothal Callender could be the new Galaxy wide system, or they may bring back BBY/ABY, but we should play it safe until such an announcement. AV-6R7 User talk:AV-6R7 02:20, August 1, 2014 (UTC)
 * May I point out that the years had been removed from the article over a month ago and that this conversation is currently irrelevant? Doctor Kermit ( Complain. ) 02:38, August 1, 2014 (UTC)
 * I will allow this. AV-6R7 User talk:AV-6R7 07:49, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

Blade Squadron canonocity
Do we have a valid source stating that the short story Blade Squadron is indeed canon and not legends? DarthRevan1173 (Long live Lord Revan) 03:30, May 31, 2014 (UTC)
 * For the time being, we only have that report from the fan website Lightsaber Rattling. Granted, this is not much, but the picture they provide looks enough like a genuine extract from a preview of SW Insider 150. At any rate, the issue will be released on June 10; if it turns out the whole thing was bogus, it won't be long until we can fix this all. -- Lelal Mekha  Old Republic military symbol.svg(Audience Room) 08:47, May 31, 2014 (UTC)

Release Dates
Hi All,

First of all thanks for the up-keep and work you have done on this page, it is a really useful tool. As a user of the site I just have a suggestion. Would it be possible to add an extra column in for the date of release? I would find it very useful and I am certain others would as well. The amount of Star Wars Canon media is going to go ballistic over the next few years with all the Film tie-ins, Rebels tie-ins, potential new TV shows and new Computer Games. I can envisage this page becoming a bit overwhelming and the ability to sort by release date would become even more useful.

If I had any skill or knowledge I would attempt to do this myself. Also, I wouldn't want to step on anybody's toes.

82.33.46.36 13:15, July 3, 2014 (UTC)

Is anyone opposed to this? We could just rename the now blank "year" column for release dates, since the canon timeline doesn't go by BBY/ABY. -- 19:52, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * I do not think I would be in favor of adding the release dates to the timeline. It's primary purpose is as an in-universe relative timeline. As there will almost certainly be a canonical dating system in the (hopefully near) future, replacing the "Year" column would make for a messy situation whenever that comes out. I'd be more inclined to add a column to the right, but there is already a lot of info jammed onto this page already, and I do not think it would serve very well. Release dates can already be found on individual article pages, the OOU year pages (ex. 2014) and at one time on List of Star Wars media, but that last doesn't seem to have been updated recently. Tainb&#39;ocu&#39;chulainn (talk) 20:40, July 15, 2014 (UTC)
 * --Morawcik (talk) 07:00, July 31, 2014 (UTC) That why there is Writer(s) column? It's not "in-universe" writer(s).

What about using the Rebels Lothal Year? In the absence of anything else, it gives us the dates we need, cf. Ezra Bridger. --Morbus Iff (talk) 20:11, July 25, 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks for considering. My thoughts were that this list could be sorted by release date as an additional option. It could then be used to see what has recently been released. Does anybody know of an alternative? I thought this list could have been good for this as it is very complete and has all of the different media in one place.

82.33.46.36 00:15, July 28, 2014 (UTC)

I actually agree and think it would be awesome to have a release date column. It would be very convenient for those of us who want to keep up-to-date on canon media, instead of looking through the list for new entries. While I understand the argument presented against it, I really don't see it hurting anything--75.170.134.240 01:38, March 10, 2015 (UTC)

I want to also jump in and say that I would greatly appreciate having a release date column for easy sorting. To address the point about this being an "in-universe timeline," I think that premise is okay but is already being violated by having the "Writer(s)" column there. Adding a date column would only make it easier for everyone to see when each work was added to the canon. As of right now I have to cross-reference this page with the "List of Star Wars Media" page, which can be a pain.

Rebels Episode Novelizations
If The Rebellion Begins by Michael Kogge is on this list, then shouldn't Rise of the Rebels releasing Aug 5 2014 and Droids in Distress releasing Nov 18, 2014 be on there as well? All three books are episode novelizations, so shouldn't they all be on the list?--Macewindu1999 (talk) 19:25, July 25, 2014 (UTC)macewindu1999
 * I'd say so. There's a bunch of young reader books coming out in two weeks too which are "adventures". --Morbus Iff (talk) 20:09, July 25, 2014 (UTC)


 * I, however, wouldn't add those young reader books to the list because they are pretty much just depicting scenes, and wouldn't add anything to canon, but I would add any chapter books that come out.--72.94.62.242 20:29, July 25, 2014 (UTC)macewindu1999


 * I waffle back and forth on the young readers stuff. Comic books are "just scenes with words" too. For me, if a young readers book has them going on an "adventure" and "doing something", then it's adding something to the canon. And, as such, it should be noted. It's unfair to say "well, this new factoid in this young readers book should go into the Ezra article, but the book isn't good enough to go into the timeline...". --Morbus Iff (talk) 23:02, July 25, 2014 (UTC)

Leland Chee
Just to make things confusing, Leland Chee said here that ANH is still Year 0. --Alientraveller (talk) 19:48, August 7, 2014 (UTC)
 * This is not confusing. Chee first gave us the time spans between the movies, and he used TPM as a starting point since it's the OOU beginning of the saga. But ANH is still the in-universe reference. -- Lelal Mekha  Old Republic military symbol.svg(Audience Room) 13:02, August 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * I was wondering if this meant we list TPM as B32, as it's currently Year 0 on our timeline. --Alientraveller (talk) 13:18, August 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * https://twitter.com/HolocronKeeper/status/497744892207316992 So it seems like we need to change our timeline once more.--Hafje (talk) 18:53, August 9, 2014 (UTC)

The dates need to be adjusted on the Timeline of media page, Leeland has confirmed the BBY/ABY system is still in place. --98.222.80.150 12:50, August 11, 2014 (UTC) Darth Maul - Son of Dathomir uses the BBY/ABY system BTW. Patsoumas1995 (talk) 19:47, August 12, 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't recall him saying the BBY/ABY timeline is still in place, just that the tweet using Episode I as Year 0 was not indicative of a new dating system (just a reference to how many years are between each movie/TV show, with Episode I as the chronological beginning). Do you have a link to where he said the BBY/ABY system is still in place? - Brandon Rhea (talk) 16:10, August 11, 2014 (UTC)
 * This tweet doesn't explicitly say "BBY" or "ABY", but does say that "We'll still use timelines that mark Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope as Year 0." Which all but confirms BBY/ABY is staying, at least from an OOU perspective, if not as an IU dating system. Tainb&#39;ocu&#39;chulainn (talk) 16:27, August 11, 2014 (UTC)
 * Those were presumably printed before the Canon/Legends announcement, so the basic consensus was to wait to see what newer works&mdash;such as A New Dawn&mdash;say about a dating system before committing to anything based on Son of Dathomir. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 21:59, August 12, 2014 (UTC)

It seems like this "Lothal Year" might be a new dating system that could be applied to all galactic events. It is kind of inconvenient the way they rebooted the EU like this but I understand why they did it. Matt Seay (talk) 22:06, August 12, 2014 (UTC)
 * Lothal Year is specific to Lothal, so should only be used on pages relating to Lothal. Once there's an official galactic dating system, then that system can be applied to all relevant pages. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 22:09, August 12, 2014 (UTC)

If A New Hope is still Year Zero, I see no reason to do away with BBY/ABY. But That is up to LucasFilm. Matt Seay (talk)

Timeline section for media
Since there are these numbers starting with TPM at 0 and going up to 66 for Episode VII should these be how the timeline section for films/tv shows, etc be done, putting that number on it? Matt Seay (talk) 09:54, August 12, 2014 (UTC)
 * As noted and discussed in the above topic, Leland Chee has confirmed that A New Hope is still year 0. Tainb&#39;ocu&#39;chulainn (talk) 17:39, August 12, 2014 (UTC)

I was wanting to make sure. I was confused by the numbering system. Matt Seay (talk) 21:56, August 12, 2014 (UTC)

Chapter Books
I can see an argument for adding chapter books to the timeline, but I still don't agree that they should be added for a number of reasons. One, they were not added previously for a reason - who really wants to know when a book targeted at 6-8 year olds is set in the timeline? It doesn't serve a benefit. Second, their adherence to canon is questionable at best. Most children's books take liberties with storyline/dialogue/etc that should not be held up next to a novel/film/tv show's depiction of events as equally viable canon. Third, I object to the reclassification of media on this page without public discussion. I will submit to majority opinion (see the timeline dating, about which I was eventually proven correct), but I want to have a voice in the discussion. Tainb&#39;ocu&#39;chulainn (talk) 16:27, August 13, 2014 (UTC) The Star Wars: Rebels: Story & Activity Book will also have an original story in it, so it should be added. There will also be 2 more Servants of the Empire novels, and 2 more untitled chapter books. Patsoumas1995 (talk) 21:45, August 14, 2014 (UTC) I get that this page is supposed to be a catch-all, but what purpose does that really serve? We're only a year into new-canon and the page has already become an overcrowded mess. When things like "Untitled Force Awakens Book and Magnet Set" are being added, I think we've gone too far. The main purpose of this list, as most people will want to use it, is to find out what all they need to read/watch to "complete" the canon and see what order it goes in. And while that technically includes the JR/YR books and picture books and such, an extremely small people are really looking for that information. Even worse are the adaptations; with every episode of Rebels getting an adaptation, we're already up to 41 different adaptations on this list, and that's just going to keep going up.
 * Why is this even a debate? The name of the page is "Timeline of canon media," not "Timeline of some canon media." It's canonical and it's media, therefore it should be here. We have more specific pages&mdash;i.e. Timeline of canon comics, Timeline of canon books, and so forth&mdash;in order to filter things. This page is the catch-all. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 16:32, August 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Brandon. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 19:13, August 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * I really want to know when any media is part of the timeline, regardless of whom the audience is. --Morbus Iff (talk) 16:54, August 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I added all the young readers and junior books to a filterable category so you can "click to hide" the things you don't care to see. --Morbus Iff (talk) 16:57, August 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * I think we need to record everything here. No exceptions. AV-6R7 User talk:AV-6R7 22:35, August 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, everything. This isn't really up for debate. This is a catch-all page. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 22:43, August 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * Do you have any sources Patsoumas? -- 03:52, August 16, 2014 (UTC)
 * In the amazon.com page, it says that it will include "an original Star Wars Rebels tale". Patsoumas1995 (talk) 12:53, August 17, 2014 (UTC)
 * You should also add the new Disney junior novels of episodes 4-6. --(Macewindu1999)

Now, maybe this just means we need to create a new page. But it needs to happen soon, because this page is becoming unusable for those needs. And no, sorting doesn't solve the problem, because clearing YR and JR gets rid of books like Ezra's Gamble and Servants of the Empire. Not to mention the fact that the unreleased list remains cluttered due to sorting limitations.

Commander not canon
I read that at the Star Wars Commander 'Meet the Creators' event the creators said it wasn't canon due to "game mechanics" -Macewindu1999
 * Do you have a link to verify this? - Brandon Rhea (talk) 02:41, August 22, 2014 (UTC)
 * Presumably here, though I've yet to find a video recording: http://www.theforce.net/story/front/Report_From_Star_Wars_Commander_Meet_The_Creators_Event_In_New_York_159561.asp https://twitter.com/ericgeller/statuses/502585131350364160 --Morbus Iff (talk) 00:14, August 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Personally, I think they don't mean the entire thing is non-canon, just that not all of the story is canon because it can be customized, and not all of the vehicles work the same way. (In game, AT-ATs are being transported by Imp Shuttles, and AT-STs have the firepower of only ten stormtroopers.) In other words, not all the numbers are correct, and only one ending will be canon, but it is canon that the Empire used 2B Hover Tanks and AT-MPs. We'll have to wait for further info. CloneMarshalCommanderCody (talk) 00:13, September 5, 2014 (UTC)
 * That was exactly how I interpreted-- that material within it was considered canon unless a particular detail is only true based on a gameplayer decision. In other words, Saponza exists, but who can say whether he ever sided with the Empire or the Rebellion? ProfessorTofty (talk) 00:23, September 5, 2014 (UTC)
 * Correct. Also, all the missions after choosing the faction are still Canon as well, considering they're exactly the same for both Empire and Republic, we just have to be vague when creating articles, for example, mention that Saponza aligned with one of them, but don't say which. --Dentface (talk) 17:42, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Junior Novelizations
First of all, I most certainly believe they should be on this list. I just think they should be either lumped into the young readers category or be given a category of their own, rather than remaining in the novels category. I would like to be able to press "hide junior novelizations" so I can only see "the real deal." CloneMarshalCommanderCody (talk) 00:55, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
 * I decided to be bold, and I changed it. I also caught an error with the classification of Star Wars: Commander. It had been in unpublished instead of videogame. CloneMarshalCommanderCody (talk) 16:19, September 13, 2014

My opinion is that there should be a different category as it was before - "Junior Novels". They are different than "Young Readers" (like 6-8 years old) and are more like regular novels.Kovallo (talk) 19:37, September 15, 2014

My opinion is that they should not be with Adult Novels. I think they go better with young readers if they do not have their own category. --Marboo Rickle (talk) 10:04, September 17, 2014 (UTC)

For now, we only have a handful of canon junior novels released or coming down the pipeline. Once we get a larger number, I think then it would be a good idea to give it its own category. --Dentface (talk) 21:27, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

Is there a way to separate the YR and JR books into different tabs. I know the YR books are canon but it would be nice to be able to filter them out for fans that are not into the very young age "beginning to read books" but would still like to view JR books in the timeline like Ezra's Gamble and Servants of the Empire. --Clone Trooper Rex (talk) 04:30, September 29, 2014 (UTC)

Would it be possible to have a separate tab for or an option to hide adaptations/novelizations? When it comes to YR books, there's a big difference between a book like EZRA'S GAMBLE, which is its own unique story, and RISE OF THE REBELS, which is just an adaptation of the SWR movie. I understand the novelizations probably add a bit, but it would be great to filter them out, so you could just see the unique books alongside the TV episodes. --98.240.82.32 08:42, January 18, 2015 (UTC)

ABY/BBY Revisited
Why is that calendar in the timeline? I thought the decision of the last discussion was to remove it. I see Leeland Chee's twitter is the source for it. Is this valid? Am I missing something? CloneMarshalCommanderCody (talk) 00:58, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh. I see another discussion. But still, there was no consensus (at least not on this page), so why was it changed? If it was a City Hall decision, could someone provide me a link? CloneMarshalCommanderCody (talk) 01:02, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
 * I've removed the BBY/ABY references. That is not an official canon dating system at this time. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 01:07, September 10, 2014 (UTC)
 * While BBY/ABY has not been explicitly confirmed, shouldn't the dates be used? Chee's tweet did explicitly say that they will use timelines with Episode IV as Year 0. Tainb&#39;ocu&#39;chulainn (talk) 13:27, September 11, 2014 (UTC)
 * Right now we have the dates based around Episode I. That's what Chee primarily tweeted out and, with the absence of an official dating system, that's the easiest and clearest one to go with. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 14:59, September 11, 2014 (UTC)
 * So, Chee has confirmed that they will be using a timeline based on Episode IV as year 0, and that using Episode I as year 0 is not an official timeline. StarWars.com has been publishing recent articles using BBY/ABY. It seems to me we should likewise be using BBY/ABY rather than the current Episode I-based system.--GuybrushThreepio (talk) 16:28, January 22, 2015 (UTC)

(reset indent) We've known about Leland's tweet, but it doesn't say whether or not ABY/BBY is still an actual dating system. It just says they have a calendar system based on Episode IV. As for the StarWars.com blogs, those are not officially vetted by the Lucasfilm Story Group. They deal in both Canon and Legends information. We asked one of the authors who said that he doubts they could be considered canon. Put simply, those blogs have no canon status that we know of. Until we see an official canon source use BBY/ABY, or until we see an official Lucasfilm voice say that that dating system is being used, then we shouldn't use it. For the purposes of this page, Episode I is the earliest chronological story, so having it set as 0 and then going from there makes the most sense until such time as there is an actual, official calendar system. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 17:03, January 22, 2015 (UTC)

I realize this conversation seemingly wrapped up a while back, but I feel like the current numbering system for years in this timeline is a bit misguided and represents the opposite of what "makes the most sense". Sure, there's no indication BBY/ABY is a valid in-universe dating system, and sure, Leland Chee's oft-mentioned tweet about A New Hope still being year 0 doesn't canonize the usage of the specific BBY/ABY dating system... but I can't help but feel as if the concept of the original film being year 0 and the in-universe presence of BBY/ABY have been unnecessarily lumped together, and the concepts - for the sake of simple practicality - need to be compartmentalized. The usage of ANH as year 0 originated before BBY/ABY was formalized as an in-universe dating system, and was used in real life in the second "A Guide to the Star Wars Universe". The book is not an in-universe text, but still used ANH as a chronological lynch-pin. The years before ANH counted down to ANH, and the years following ANH counted up from ANH. I believe the book used BSW4 and ASW4 (Before Star Wars 4/After Star Wars 4). This framing scheme was later on adapted into the in-universe BBY/ABY system.

So, in terms of the canon Star Wars timeline, we have two facts from an official source to work with: 1) BBY/ABY has not been confirmed as an in-universe dating system. 2) The real-world authorities behind the Star Wars property still use ANH as year zero. These two facts are not contradictory given the fact that ANH's position as the zero year is not inherently linked to the usage of BBY/ABY. So, in short, the NOMENCLATURE is up in the air, but the format of the timeline should not be... yet this page, for the sake of "simplicity", has grossly complicated the system by mis-interpreting the notion of in-universe vs. out-of-universe organization and the relevance of both on the concept of canonicity. BBY/ABY may not be canon, but that doesn't mean that Wookieepedia can't use BSW4/ASW4 -- or for that matter any sensible label it wants (even BBY/ABY as a real-world reference referring to the movie without it's in-universe correlate) -- because Wookieepedia itself doesn't exist in the Star Wars canon. It isn't pedantically bound by that kind of thing... otherwise, all of these articles would be in Aurebesh, not the Latin alphabet.

For the sake of simplicity and reasonable organization, I urge you to permit the usage of a timeline scheme that uses ANH as year zero at most, and at the very least to re-open a dialogue about it. Given the fact that Chee stated that Lucasfilm still considers ANH to be year zero, the obvious response to the lack of a canon label would be to have a filler label in the meantime, use the old label in the meantime, or anything else along those lines. What has happened instead is self-contradictory. We know how the timeline should be displayed, but we don't know an "official" label.... so instead of merely going without any official label, we've also taken it upon ourselves to impose OUR year system on the franchise? If the idea was to stay as canonical as possible and wait for a label, don't you think it's an even LARGER peel-away from the canon to impose upon the franchise a fan-made calendar system and ignore the clear and direct words of a member of the actual Lucasfilm Story Group? This is a very clear case of not seeing the forest for the trees. Listen to logic and reason... set this right, folks! 76.77.129.170 05:34, August 14, 2015 (UTC)
 * You make a good point, but the primary source for this timeline is Leland's tweet, “0 10 10-13 13 27 32 35 36." Unless/until he explicitly says otherwise, this is what we're going off of. Brandon's above messages clarify this reasoning. Cwedin (talk) 09:25, August 14, 2015 (UTC)

Deleted Scenes?
Are those canon? They were G-Canon in the previous canon, so were we told anything about them? Patsoumas1995 (talk) 01:48, September 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * If they're canonized elsewhere, yes. For example, the StarWars.com Databank has stills from the deleted Biggs Darklighter scene, as well as at least one Rebel Alliance scene in Episode III. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 01:58, September 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't these imply that all the deleted scenes (except the contradictory ones) are canon? Patsoumas1995 (talk) 11:37, September 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * That would be an assumption, and we can't make assumptions. It's a safe assumption, but an assumption nonetheless. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 11:54, September 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * I've asked Leland Chee on Twitter. Who knows, maybe we'll get an answer? ProfessorTofty (talk) 18:55, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
 * I had an idea recently of adding deleted scenes proven to be canon (as in, those stated by Brandon Rhea above) to the list of canon media. They do add original storyline to the canon, so I think they would fit the requirements of the timeline. Of course, I am no expert, but I thought I'd shoot the idea out there. What do you guys think?--Rollabar (talk) 17:08, August 8, 2015 (UTC)

Junior novels
Continuing a previous discussion, should we category Junior novels under the YR category or the Novel category? In terms of length and content, I think they're closer to Novels, considering they provide much more than a sentence per page, an most of the time add new information (albeit minor in some cases) to the canon, while young readers simply retread episodes almost exactly, with screen caps from the episodes themselves. --Dentface (talk) 18:15, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd be for having them in novels myself. ProfessorTofty (talk) 18:58, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd rather have them in YR category, despite their length. If not, put them in their own category, not in the Novel category. CloneMarshalCommanderCody (talk) 20:14, October 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * I vote to have them in the novel category. If you read Edge of the Galaxy, that Junior Novel added so much to the Rebels TV series story. They add so much to the canon. --Clone Trooper Rex (talk) 14:00, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
 * It's mind-boggling to me that this conversation is still happening after all these months. They are junior novels, which is separate from novels and separate from young readers, so they should be their own category. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 15:11, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with Brandon, a separate category is probably the best way to go, considering the cadence that Disney is going to publish these within the next year. Should we replace the RPG category and make it JR, considering there are no Canon RPGs within sight? --Dentface (talk) 21:17, November 3, 2014 (UTC)
 * I say go for it, or just make another one. Or has it hit the max on the number there can be? ProfessorTofty (talk) 21:40, November 3, 2014 (UTC)
 * I've changed the "Adventure/RPG" Category to Junior novels. If we do get any RPG games for the new canon, we can always add a new category or put YR/JR back into one category. --Dentface (talk) 19:55, November 11, 2014 (UTC)

Disney reprints EU novels WITHOUT Legends banner
I noticed a curious thing on The Disney Books website. They've reprinted a good bunch of old EU novels under the Disney banner. Some of them have been reprinted with the Legends banner, such as the Boba Fett books and Lives and Adventures. However, the Jedi Quest junior novels and the novelizations of Episodes I-VI have been reprinted without the Legends banner. It doesn't seem like an error in publishing, since they selectively put the Legends banner some places, and others they did not. Does anyone know who we can contact to clarify this? --Dentface (talk) 23:01, November 4, 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, those are on here too. I just assumed they didn't want to muddy things when it came to young audiences by putting the banner on there or something. But they're clearly Legends, as they obviously conflict with other material labeled canon. ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:41, November 4, 2014 (UTC)
 * Update-- if you look at our page for The Moment of Truth, you can see one with the Legends banner on there. So they're legends even if some of the reissues Disney is putting out don't have the banner. ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:43, November 4, 2014 (UTC)

Rebel Journal
A page was recently created for Rebel Journal by Ezra Bridger, which is in a way "a book within a book". The actual printed book Star Wars Rebels: Rebel Journal by Ezra Bridger is a reference book, and the page in question is featured within it. A reference book isn't considering in-universe media, but the journal is. So the question is, what category do we put the Rebel Journal into on this page? It is currently listed under the young readers category, but I'm not entirely sure that fits. Should it be under promotional material, or even short story? --Dentface (talk) 20:31, November 22, 2014 (UTC)

If it adds something new to the canon that was not seen in the show maybe it should be either in the short stories or promotional categories. The YR stuff is pretty much an adaptation of what we've seen on the show but targeted to a much younger audience. --Clone Trooper Rex (talk) 23:38, December 3, 2014 (UTC)

Meet the Rebels?
What is that? Is it a reference book, an adaptation of an episode, or an original story? Patsoumas1995 (talk) 15:30, December 3, 2014 (UTC)
 * It's a very tiny reference book which includes biographies of the major characters. Just like all the old DK readers. Corellian Premier Jedi symbol.svg Force will be with you always 23:47, December 3, 2014 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't it get removed then? Patsoumas1995 (talk) 11:04, December 4, 2014 (UTC)
 * If it's a reference book, it isn't "in-universe" media, which is what this page covers. If we're doing so, Beware the Inquisitor! should be removed as well. --Dentface (talk) 19:41, December 21, 2014 (UTC)

UK & German comics
Will the UK comics (volume 7+) & the upcoming German Rebels comics be added? Patsoumas1995 (talk) 01:17, December 29, 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't think there's a page added for that yet. It has been confirmed as canon, so when a page is created, it should be added here. --Dentface (talk) 22:15, January 9, 2015 (UTC)

Removal of the DK books
The DK Rebels books aren't in-universe stories, but are in fact reference books along the lines of Star Wars Rebels: The Visual Guide, but for younger kids. Should we remove these, as the Legends timeline doesn't include reference books, or should we create a separate section to list them? --Dentface (talk) 22:11, January 9, 2015 (UTC)

Latest "Rebels" episodes are (probably) set in year 28, not 27
Although the setting of Star Wars Rebels started at 5 years before the Battle of Yavin, it seems that the episodes that came after Empire Day are set 4 years before that battle. According to his profile card on the Rebels official Facebook page, Tarkin was 60 when he appeared in the show, and we know from Luceno's novel that he was born 64 years before Yavin. 91.177.236.24 19:19, February 16, 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, during Empire Day it is specifically mentioned as being 15 years after the founding of the Empire. Under the current listing, that episode is shown as only 14 years after the founding of the Empire.--Todjaeger (talk) 06:11, November 5, 2015 (UTC)

Adaptations and Such
I understand that young readers adaptations and such need to be on this page, but I think it would be much better if they had their own color. Personally, I like to use this list to find new stories to read, and it's nice to be able to filter out things. Not being a child, I have no desire to read Ezra's Wookiee Rescue (as it has no unique story and is just an adaptation of part of Star Wars Rebels: Spark of Rebellion), but I would like to read Ezra's Gamble because it has its own story (and everyone likes Bossk). Anyone agree? CloneMarshalCommanderCody (talk) 04:07, March 3, 2015 (UTC) Young Readers do have their own color, white. Junior Novels have been separate for awhile now, just click the button in the white box above the timeline to filter out the young readers books from the timeline. --Dentface (talk) 23:19, March 6, 2015 (UTC)
 * This does seem like a good idea, and I too don't care too much about adaptations (although I have heard some of the junior novel adaptations of the Rebels shows add good insight into the characters thoughts, but I'm getting off topic here), but I don't think it is something the wiki can easily do. There are only so many filters they can have sadly. To resolve filtering issues, I simply created a word document, copied and pasted the timeline, and removed all adaptions. Doesn't take too long, and is a helpful way of self-filtering, as the wiki won't always fit our filtering desires :P --Rollabar (talk) 04:38, August 7, 2015 (UTC)
 * Just to add: I have created a Python script to extract the table into a CSV file. You can open the CSV file with Excel or any other modern spreadsheet program, and you can filter to your heart's desire. :) [ pepoluan  talk ] 19:03, August 7, 2015 (UTC)
 * Awesome! --Rollabar (talk) 21:29, August 7, 2015 (UTC)

No, no. That's not what I meant. I'm talking about things that are adaptations of other things. Many junior novels have unique stories, and I'm suggesting that they be distinct from the ones that are just adaptations of the movies/tv show. CloneMarshalCommanderCody (talk) 01:33, March 17, 2015 (UTC)

As a new reader of this Wikia, I really think adaptations need their own color too. I don't think we need to list The Phantom Menace twice because the video game has the same story of the film. Not to mention all the other novels and such that just get in the way because they're simply adaptations, and not actual chapters in the canon (they're non-canon in my book, but that's another debate). Adaptations need a filter. 21:22, May 4, 2015 (UTC)

Comic strips vs. comic books
I think it would be a good idea to list the comic strips that are found in other releases (like the UK Rebels magazine) in a separate category from the comic books release by Marvel and Dark Horse.

Classify Lost Stars as an adult novel?
Should we move Lost Stars from the Junior novel classification to the adult novel classification on this page? The book has 304 pages, about 100 more than the Star Wars Rebels chapter books that are considered junior, it even has more than Tarkin. The official listing for the book also calls it a "young adult novel" rather than a "junior novel" like some of the others by D-LF Press did. --Dentface (talk) 21:17, April 4, 2015 (UTC)


 * As it's coming from Disney-Lucasfilm Press, I would recommend keeping it as a junior novel, at least for now. DLP to date has only done young reader and junior novels; adult novels are licensed to Del Rey. While the "young adult novel" appellation does raise questions, I would wait and see what the actual book is like. Page count is only part of the story; things like the height and width of the book and the font size play a huge role in determining the length of the book. If we get the actual book and it feels more like an adult novel, then we can decide to switch then. &mdash;MJ&mdash; War Room 23:42, April 5, 2015 (UTC)


 * Alright, sounds good. --Dentface (talk) 00:19, April 6, 2015 (UTC)


 * So why was Lost Stars ultimately classified as a regular novel?
 * As you insist: because it is a novel, albeit one aimed at young adults. YR are for children. --Alientraveller (talk) 18:36, January 29, 2016 (UTC)


 * Right, YR are for the children. The agreement was to make it JR. JR are novels made for young adults. Think early-mid teens. I've changed it back to JR. If you find this disagreeable, please discuss it here before changing it.Wraith (talk) 21:55, February 1, 2016 (UTC)

Lords of the Sith in the Timeline
In the official timeline released with the reprint of A New Dawn, LotS takes place before Tarkin. Was wondering why it's placed after Tarkin here. Insert non-formatted text here
 * Tarkin's opening crawl places it as being 5 years after ROTS, while Lords of the Sith's crawl puts itself at 8 years after ROTS. The Del Rey timeline appears to be incorrect. &mdash; DigiFluid(Whine here) 15:00, April 20, 2015 (UTC)
 * It's stated that LotS happens 8 years after the Clone Wars, which could mean the start of the Clone Wars, putting it in the same year as Tarkin.--178.117.184.14 15:55, April 20, 2015 (UTC)
 * The timeline in Lords of the Sith itself places it before Tarkin. As such, the 8 years must refer to the Battle of Geonosis. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 16:03, April 20, 2015 (UTC)
 * After the war started, rather than its ending, would be a very strange take on the grammar of "Eight years after the Clone Wars ravaged the galaxy," IMO. To draw a real-world parallel, most people would say that 1955 would be "ten years after World War Two," but it would be really strange to refer to it as being "16 years after" (referring to 1939). That's my read of it, anyhow. &mdash; DigiFluid(Whine here) 16:07, April 20, 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not the first time that these crawls have had weird grammar. The crawl in Tarkin said something like "The Jedi were killed in dreaded Order 66." Lots of fans said it should be "the dreaded" but Del Rey insisted on that grammar (which I suppose is grammatically correct). Nonetheless, the timeline places it before Tarkin in the hardcover of Lords of the Sith. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 16:11, April 20, 2015 (UTC)

Adding release date
I'd like to add a "Released" column with values in the form "YYYY-MM-DD". I tend to read/enjoy things in publication order vs. chronological order and being still relatively early in the "new canon" movement, this shouldn't require too much work (to add to the page, or to "catch up" as it were, if one desired to read everything). The *default* written/sort order will remain as it is now (chronological), but just like you can sort by "Writer", this would allow folks (like me) to sort by publication date, without having to slog through the much wordier and unfilterable 2015. Any yay, nays, or mehs? Will likely do this early next week. --Morbus Iff (talk) 14:25, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Dentface beat me to the punch by adding the rest of the dates to the page, but he also changed them into the unsortable "Month Day, Year" format vs. YYYY-MM-DD. That defeats the entire purpose of adding this column to the page (and I've mentioned this to him on his User talk) - I'd rather NOT duplicate the data unless the duplication serves a purpose (i.e., by being sortable). --Morbus Iff (talk) 01:54, June 27, 2015 (UTC)

Definitive Timeline Placements
Many titles on the page are sorted by IU starting date (i.e. Dark Disciple), while others are sorted by ending date (i.e. Story Before the Force Awakens). I propose that entries should be sorted by ending date (when applicable) or sorted by release dates when there are overlaps: ex. Kanan #1 and Revenge of the Sith. Thoughts? (: 104.193.153.174 23:13, July 7, 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the reason the timeline is sorted this way is because we don't have access to all the starting/ending dates of such material. Thus, any date at all is helpful. Plus, the date is not extremely specific - simply a year - and thus the only time this would be an issue would be the turning over of a year such as in Dark Disciple. However, this is made clear in the timeline as the years the book takes place in are shown to be both "12" and "13". I believe that other media is assumed to begin and end in the same year. But good thinking; I hadn't thought about the difference in ways the media could be sorted in terms of dates. --Rollabar (talk) 04:30, August 7, 2015 (UTC)

New way of sorting
Hi All!

I think it would be helpful if we added one more column for sorting. This column should say if something was released or not so then we can use the current column with abbreviations to sort both released and unreleased stuff. Now you cannot sort unreleased things by the media type and I think it can be useful.

What do You think?

--Kovallo (talk) 14:10, July 24, 2015 (UTC)


 * Confused - can't you just hide/unhide the "Unreleased" items? --Morbus Iff (talk) 14:22, July 24, 2015 (UTC)


 * Of course I can - but I don't want to hide them I want to sort them, for instance I want to see all comic books due to be released so I just hide all released items and sort the rest by the letter "C". --Kovallo (talk) 14:25, July 24, 2015 (UTC)


 * Ok. How about we don't ever include a publication date until it has been released? Then, the lack of a publication date value is "not released"? --Morbus Iff (talk) 14:28, July 24, 2015 (UTC)


 * We could but it also may be confusing to some, and the release dates may be handy as well. Instead of adding a column we could add new abbreviations for unreleased items: C(NR), N(NR), F(NR), where NR is Not Released and add new sorting buttons.--Kovallo (talk) 14:31, July 24, 2015 (UTC)


 * I think the best solution is to change the class of an unpublished material to its media type and keep the background colors the same. Cwedin (talk) 14:37, July 24, 2015 (UTC)


 * It is a good idea but still if someone wants to filter out all unreleased items will not be able to do so--Kovallo (talk) 16:49, July 24, 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not too familiar with this, but is there a way for cells to belong to multiple categories at once? (i.e. "film" & "unpublished") Cwedin (talk) 16:58, July 24, 2015 (UTC)


 * This one is a good idea but I don't think there is such a possibility, I tried to serach for some info but i found nothing and when I added a second class to the cell it only responded to the last one - not both :| --Kovallo (talk) 16:11, July 25, 2015 (UTC)


 * Shucks. : / While it would be nice to have an extra filter for unreleased material, I believe adding an extra column might be a bit excessive. I think we should keep things the way they are until another solution shows. Cwedin (talk) 17:12, July 25, 2015 (UTC)


 * I've just updated my Python script for extracting the Table into CSV. The CSV file generated should be directly openable by Excel (or any spreadsheet program), and now adds a column "Rls?" to indicate if the media has been released or not. If you know a bit about Python, feel free to try it. After all, if you need advanced filtering/ordering, you can't beat a fully-fledged spreadsheet program. [ pepoluan  talk ] 18:37, August 13, 2015 (UTC)

Dark Disciple's placement
This has probably already been covered elsewhere, but where exactly did the idea come from that Dark Disciple takes place in concurrence with the events of Son of Dathomir? Bane7670 (talk) 15:40, August 11, 2015 (UTC)


 * One of the references cited next to Dark Disciple links to an official Clone Wars timeline on StarWars.com that says half of the book takes place prior to Son of Dathomir, and the other half takes place after it. The book adapts a season seven arc and a season eight arc, but were grouped together for the overall theme of the novel. --Dentface (talk) 15:50, August 11, 2015 (UTC)

Holiday Special's placement
According to an interview with MTV (available here: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/72588) JJ Abrams says that the Special is "definitely canon." Should we add this to the Timeline then? Thoughts? RangerSmith (talk) 17:49, September 6, 2015 (UTC)
 * No, Abrams was clearly joking. Cwedin (talk) 17:58, September 6, 2015 (UTC)

Timeframe of Kanan 1 Prologue, Kanan 5 Epilogue, and Kanan 6
For the above canon media their reference said that, and I quote: (In the prologue, the entire Ghost crew is aware of Fulcrum, meaning it is set sometime after "Gathering Forces.")

However, to the best of my knowledge, Fulcrum's existence had been known since "Out of Darkness".

So, these three pieces of canon media have two possible places: (1) between "Out of Darkness" and "Empire Day", or (2) between "Gathering Forces" and "Path of the Jedi".

What do you think? [ pepoluan  talk ] 09:37, September 10, 2015 (UTC)


 * The key word here is ENTIRE Ghost crew. In "Out of Darkness" only Sabine found out (if I remember correctly). I'll verify this later. Cwedin (talk) 11:19, September 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I don't recall a scene/statement that confirms entire crew knew about Fulcrum. I might be overlooking the hints, though. I'll rewatch the episodes tonight. [ pepoluan  talk ] 13:04, September 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * Just rewatched "Out of Darkness," and I was wrong. Very early into the episode Hera mentions Fulcrum to the crew, meaning the comic could be nearly anywhere before or after it. Hopefully the upcoming Kanan comic clarifies its placement. Cwedin (talk) 14:17, September 10, 2015 (UTC)
 * I also realized that Ezra still had his energy slingshot on Kanan #6's cover. Although, as usual, the cover may or may not represent what will actually happen in the story. But it's probably the strongest hint, yet. [ pepoluan  talk ] 13:14, September 17, 2015 (UTC)
 * Has any more thought been put into this? In Kanan 6, Kanan refers to "the Rebellion." Apart from Hera, the Lothal rebels don't consider themselves to be a part of any larger "Rebellion" until the end of "Fire Across the Galaxy." While it's true that all crew members know Fulcrum's identity by that point, is it possible that they use her code name in the way they use their "Specter" names? I agree that Ezra's slingshot poses a problem, but (as you mention) cover art doesn't always accurately represent the content of the comic. Can I suggest that the discussed comics, as well as the prologue of Kanan 7, take place at some point between "Fire Across the Galaxy" and "The Lost Commanders" (given Sabine's hair color)? Obi-wan Baloney (talk) 16:09, October 28, 2015 (UTC)
 * I completely agree. Kanan didn't know the details of a larger rebellion until "Fire Across the Galaxy." The one flaw this presents is that in #6, Kanan says it's been 14 years since he left Kaller; however, years overlap and aren't always a to-the-day basis, so this can be overlooked. Cwedin (talk) 01:53, October 29, 2015 (UTC)

&lt;ref name="LYC" /&gt;
Is it necessary to put &lt;ref name="LYC" /&gt; on every line? It's been used 311x last time I check. I propose putting that ref on the "Year" column heading instead, and clean up all ref's in that column. [ pepoluan  talk ] 05:19, September 16, 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree, though I'd suggest keeping it on the mentioned items, i.e. films and TV movies. Cwedin (talk) 05:32, September 16, 2015 (UTC)

Timeline
As many of you know, there's a discrepancy over the placement of titles that span multiple years (titles such as Dark Disciple and Lost Stars). Ultimately (with prologues and epilogues removed), there are two options: The former option is currently practiced on the timeline of Legends media, while this timeline (with the exception of Dark Disciple) uses the latter option. I support option 2 on the basis that it's "less spoilery." For example, I'd rather watch the original trilogy before reading Lost Stars. Additionally, many titles span from Years 0–X, and I feel it's better to spread these out at Years 13, 32, 36, 66, etc., rather than clustering them at the beginning of the page. It's important this debate gets settled; the timeline expands every week with new material, and this also affects other pages, such as the timeline of canon books. Cwedin (talk) 20:12, October 23, 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Place titles by their starting date.
 * 2) Place titles by their ending date.
 * It affects any in-universe page that has an Appearances section that includes those titles in question, since those listings should match whatever we're using on the timeline. Personally, I prefer the former option. First, as has been said, it's what we're already using on the Legends timeline, so this keeps us consistent. Secondly, it just makes sense to me to begin at the beginning. I'm not sure how one option is any "less spoilery" than the other. For example, placing The Secret Academy using the second option gives away the fact that a lot of it takes place after The Inquisitor is killed, etc. ProfessorTofty (talk) 21:33, October 23, 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree hugely with Cwedin. As someone reading and playing and watching through the Star Wars chronology right now, this timeline would be absolutely useless to me if it placed Lost Stars etc before the movies.  The second option makes it a user-friendly guide as an actual order in which to experience Star Wars.  ProfessorTofty, I don't quite understand your point about the second option giving away that a lot of The Secret Academy takes place after the Inquisitor is killed?  Surely if I read the Secret Academy before watching the final 3 episodes of Rebels Season 1, I'd know the Inquisitor is scheduled to die and all the heroes make it out unscathed, kinda "spoiling" the episodes for me, don't you think?  --Mythicia77 (talk) 22:40, October 23, 2015 (UTC)
 * Thinking about it, my "less spoilery" argument generally holds up, but because the timeline excludes epilogues, it's kinda mute; i.e. Star Wars 7 spoils quite a bit... I still think option 2 would look nicer though. Cwedin (talk) 22:49, October 23, 2015 (UTC)
 * This timeline should be consistent with what we do in Appearances sections, which is the widely-established practice of listing appearances by their starting timeframe. Cade  StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit.svg  Calrayn  22:56, October 23, 2015 (UTC)
 * Considering it, I agree. It may not be as reader-friendly, but it complies with what's already been established. Plus, the cells on the timeline specify the placement, so users are aware of overlaps and can make their own decisions on reading/viewing order. Cwedin (talk) 23:49, October 23, 2015 (UTC)

Twilight Company Placement
I don't think the novel Battlefront: Twilight Company is properly placed on the timeline. The Rise of the Empire Chronology insert indicates this comes after A New Hope and the wiki entry for the novel indicates the Death Star was already destroyed when the story takes place. Currently it is listed as taking place before Rebels.

--Revjtanton (talk) 02:49, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
 * That's because the first chapter is 13 years after the end of the Clone Wars, which is before Rebels. As a matter of policy, where a story begins is where it's placed on a Wookieepedia timeline. From a reader perspective, though, I'd agree that it's a confusing placement. - Brandon Rhea (talk) 02:51, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
 * Ideally we create a graph of overlapping bars. Hence canon media that began quite some time ago and ended far in the future (e.g., the Lost Stars novel) will be shown as "spanning" other canon media.
 * Or, perhaps make the table has two columns for placement: "Begin Time" and "End Time", so anyone can sort the table any which way they want. [ pepoluan  talk ] 13:08, January 8, 2016 (UTC)


 * I see, that makes sense, thanks! Considering the great detail that was put in to break up Clone Wars into the proper chronology; I humbly suggest some sort of asterisk or other indication to highlight that time jump.  But if no such indicator can be done I thank you for the clarification. --Revjtanton (talk) 03:01, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
 * After reviewing some things this is inconsistant. The beginning of A New Dawn takes place in the Clone War era with Caleb Dume pressing Obi Wan about the emergency beacon on Coruscant, then jumps forward similarly to what Twilight Company does (I haven't yet read Twilight Company), yet it's listed in its proper place in the timeline.--Revjtanton (talk) 03:38, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
 * The reason for this is that A New Dawn Clone Wars scene was a prologue, whereas Twilight Company begins with chapter one, no prologue. The timeline neglects prologues and epilogues in an attempt to remove misleading placements such as the one with Twilight Company. Hope this clears things up. Cwedin (talk) 03:47, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
 * I understand the Wookieepedia policy, but shouldn't common sense take precedent? The novel has a few flashback chapters (such as chapter one) but the story takes place after Inbrief shortly before, concurrently to, and after Episode V. Shouldn't it be moved there with a note mentioning the flashback chapters (similarly to the way we have notes about prologues and epilogues)?104.148.135.115 21:16, December 27, 2015 (UTC)

Zebra striping
Did the zebra striping on the table deliberately disappear, or... ? --Morbus Iff (talk) 15:14, November 25, 2015 (UTC)
 * After an update to Wikia, the tables no longer show black borders on certain browsers, such as Safari. There's nothing we can do about it. --Dentface (talk) 22:22, December 30, 2015 (UTC)

Darth Vader Annual placement
Shouldn't Star Wars: Darth Vader Annual 1 be placed before Star Wars: Vader Down, Part I?

At the end of Darth Vader Annual 1, it says the saga continues in Vader Down.

--94.14.201.193 21:03, December 27, 2015 (UTC)

The Same with Star Wars Annual 1, it says the story continues in Vader Down. --94.14.201.193 21:46, December 27, 2015 (UTC)


 * I moved the Vader Annual before Vader Down a couple days ago. Someone else decided that "maybe he just got a new TIE" wasn't speculation, while actually seeing it shot down was, and reverted it on me. &mdash; DigiFluid(Whine here) 23:48, December 27, 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not exactly sure what you mean DigiFluid, sorry! But I think both Annuals are set before Vader Down.--Smittyjaja (talk) 12:16, December 30, 2015 (UTC)
 * The Vader Annual starts off the next story arc in the Darth Vader series, which takes place after Vader Down chronologically, even though the Annual was released before Vader Down finished. In contrast, the Star Wars Annual is not connected to any SW comic arc, so its impossible to tell where it should be placed. --Dentface (talk) 22:16, December 30, 2015 (UTC)
 * Smittyjaja, I meant only that I agree! And that I made an attempt to move it, but someone else reversed my edit, reasoning that 'maybe he was given a new TIE' was somehow less speculative than the more sensible placement that you and I agree on. &mdash; DigiFluid(Whine here) 01:49, December 31, 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of TCW
I watched and I didn't hear anything about timeline of The Clone Wars series (I'm writing about the ninth notes). Are this the dates certainly verifided? Please answer. Szturmowiec (talk) 11:51, December 29, 2015 (UTC)
 * The video mentions changing Ahsoka from 14 to 16. I've updated the reference. Cwedin (talk) 17:42, December 29, 2015 (UTC)

Cross-Sections and Visual Dictionaries
TFA Incredible Cross-Sections and TFA Visual Dictionary are both marked as Canon. Should they be on this list. Or does that open us up to needing to include things like the Rebels Sticker Collection?

These books add a lot of background info to the universe so my preference is to include them.--192.31.242.66 22:08, December 30, 2015 (UTC)


 * Those books are not actual narratives, so they are not included in the list. Reference titles and activity books are treated as OOU, or at the very least, are in universe, but do not tell a direct story (such as Star Wars: Rey's Survival Guide). Comics, novels, movies, etc. that have a direct narrative story are included on the list. --Dentface (talk) 22:14, December 30, 2015 (UTC)

Before The Phantom Menance
Do you think they will OR should make anything before The Phantom Menance canon again?

I somehow doubt they will remake ALL of The Old Republic again, I could be wrong however.

We know Darth Bane is canon, I think it would be silly to rewrite The Darth Bane Trilogy personally, they have all this material they could make canon!

--94.5.50.246 14:02, January 1, 2016 (UTC)

The Force Unleashed
Where does the video game SW: The Force Unleashed fit into this timeline?
 * That game is a part of Legends and can be found on the Legends timeline. Cwedin (talk) 07:51, January 6, 2016 (UTC)

Star Wars Korean Adaptation
What about the Korean Str Wars adaptation? I've read some of the episodes. They are pretty faithful adaptations down to the exact dialogue, the author worked closely with the Star Wars group, and it was published after the start of the "new canon"... I know the article from the starwars.wiki mentioned it was considered "Grey Canon", but I thought it might be useful to add it to the canon page with a note that some things might have been altered to reflect cultural differences.

If the community thinks it's not canon, will the webtoon fall into the "Legends" category?

Should there be a separate category for works slightly altered to reflect cultural differences, but authorized by the Star Wars group ?

--73.158.219.123 09:02, January 12, 2016 (UTC)
 * Well that's just it, the author didn't work with the Story Group; they only received editorial permission. Also, there are added scenes, reordered scenes, and altered dialogue. Due to these factors we removed the comic from the timeline. As far as creating a separate category, it would be unnecessary; this comic appears to be one-of-a-kind. Cwedin (talk) 12:57, January 12, 2016 (UTC)

-- Oh, I see... I was under the impression that the author worked closely with the SW Group, but the author just got permission to adapt the movies... That makes sense then. Thanks for clearing that up! --73.158.219.123 19:27, January 12, 2016 (UTC)

Pre Legends Canon
There should be a list of all canon media before the split. Mmwa (talk) 16:56, January 12, 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, would you make it? --Alientraveller (talk) 17:04, January 12, 2016 (UTC)


 * You mean something like this? 17:49, January 12, 2016 (UTC)

pre-ep.1:TPM
The canon Star Wars history dates-back long before the beginning of episode1 (identified on this page's timeline as 'year 0', corresponding to "32 BBY" relative to the "ABY/BBY" nomenclature), even if its relevance to the current in-chronology saga has been of low hitherto regard; this truth is supported by this website's inclusion to the same effect, e.g. on the 'galactic timeline page' and biographies of various characters and backstories which cite Disney-approved encyclopoedic sources (digital and print_form both) which entail information predating 32BBY: I submit http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_galactic_history/Canon#cite_note-Journey_Through_Space_.282015.29-3 and http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Ziro#cite_note-Ultimate_Star_Wars-0 respectively, not to mention referencing in TPM by Yoda{ a Jedi Master whose knowledge and wisdom warrants respect and authority on the topic of The Force} of the midi-chlorians from {a long period of time ago; I don't have his exact verbiage in front of me}. Similarly, none of the encyclopedias sourced for canon lore are identified on "list of canon media"; http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Canon_reference_books post-Apr.'14 entries are not found on http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_canon_media (which also starts with episode1, unlike the in-Universe galactic timeline). I would point to the article on The Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/The_Complete_Star_Wars_Encyclopedia ) as it apparently records events as far back as 25,000BBY, but being a non-mo`pic media published in 2008 (which is prior to April 2014), it is excluded from nuCanon thus is relegated to 'Legends' banner. Surely, however, some of those newer paper Disney-approved encyclopedias include details dating pre-ep1, even though apparently as of yet thir wiki overviews don't mention this fact; yet it is at the very least implicit, taking a convenient topic for quick accessibility, refer to http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars:_Absolutely_Everything_You_Need_to_Know#cite_note-amazon-0 and notice the description of mentioning "oldest Jedis" (whose lives obviously predate TPM). That of course does not scratch even the surface. There surely are plenty of canon storylines, such as of wars/empire/reimes/whatnot which predate ep1 (and ones to come post-ep9, which have not been discussed yet, and sans pre-empting or some timetracel aspect will not be described till then). I suggest that someone knowledgeable to at least verify some of the details to rectify this discordance by updating the afforementioned lists (and whatever else along these lines) accordingly. 24.209.211.120 22:42, January 13, 2016 (UTC)Victamon Edit: Count Dooku, not Chancellor, told Anakin of that Cwedin: by that token, only events that are actually visible on-[screen/page] count? any events referred by characters durin the saga, whether they were said to transpire before«»during (or »after), do not count in this context as considered "out of universe"? confused here, as they stil took place "in [the canon ] realm".., many of which with possible signifcant implications. 24.209.211.120 01:06, January 14, 2016 (UTC)Victamon Ahh,'kay, that makes sense then. But well what about on-presented flashbacks??o.O teha, only in jest do proverbially further hairs I here split.^_^ Thanks for clarifying. 216.196.187.122 11:25, January 14, 2016 (UTC)Victamon
 * While many canon sources describe pre-TPM events, this specific timeline is for in-universe narratives only, and reference books are considered OOU. Because no canon narratives are currently set prior to Episode I, this list uses TPM as its "Year 0" reference point. Cwedin (talk) 23:08, January 13, 2016 (UTC)
 * What I mean is that all canon sources "count," but this timeline is specifically for narrative media&mdash;tangible stories I can read/watch. For a timeline of in-universe events, see timeline of galactic history. Cwedin (talk) 01:17, January 14, 2016 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. Happy editing! Cwedin (talk) 15:17, January 14, 2016 (UTC)

YR books not included
Here are four YR books that are genuine story books, but that I did not see featured:

1) Star Wars Movie Theater Storybook and Lightsaber Projector -> August 25, 2015 -> 9780794434946 2) Star Wars Saga Play-a-Sound -> September 15, 2015 -> 9781503700284 3) Star Wars Sound Storybook Treasury -> August 01, 2015 -> 9781503700291 4) Star Wars Rebels Spark of Rebellion Play-a-Sound -> January 15, 2016 -> 9781503700277

I hope this is useful info : )...

--73.158.219.123 00:28, January 26, 2016 (UTC)

Lost Stars - Show/Hide Filter
Lost Stars is listed as a Junior Novel, but it's tied to the "Novels (N)" show/hide setting, not the "Junior Novels (JR)" setting. I attempted to correct this by changing its class from "novel" to "junior' in the page source. For some reason, editing the source somehow introduced other modifications into the source formatting, which broke the page, so I had to undo my edit. Can someone who knows how to make this change without the page breaking please do so?76.161.137.162 16:37, February 3, 2016 (UTC)