Talk:Dates in Star Wars

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

		Star Wars Portal This article is part of WikiProject Star Wars, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to the Star Wars saga on Wikipedia. To participate, you can improve this article or visit the project page for more information.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and leave a message on the talk page to explain the ratings and to identify possible improvements to the article.

For a September 2004 deletion debate over whther each year should have its own article see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/22 BBY

---

Contents 1 Jabba 2 Controversial Timeline ? 3 Preview function is there for a reason 4 Uncertain start of war 5 Er... 6 This page has been vandalized! 7 This is amazing 8 This does not seem to be accurate... 9 non-chronological 10 Insignificant characters don't belong in the line 11 11-19 ABY 12 Ewoks cartoon 13 Podracing? 14 Origins of the Rebel Alliance 15 Non-canon spin-offs on the Film Timeline 16 Year zero 17 Early Dates 18 Legacy of the Force 19 The End of Life 20 Star Tours 21 Formation of the galaxy 22 "Time measurement in the Star Wars galaxy" - reference to "Earth days/years/etc"

[edit] Jabba

Double birth? It says he was born in 600BBY and then again in 596BBY. Which is correct?? Tydamann (talk) 00:33, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Controversial Timeline ?

Aren't the films, and perhaps the Clone Wars animated series, the only things considered to be canon. The rest should not be included, as it has been created by other fictional writers and, if (big if) George Lucas decided, he could make more films that trash the timeline featuring all these irrelevant facts.

Then again, I'm about to get flamed by thousands of fans now aren't I?

No, it's all canon, and the writers who wrote it are quite real. - Jon Hart

Star Wars canon is quite explicit here. While the films and other works directly by George Lucas are considered "G-Canon" (G for George) and are the highest level of canon, Lucasfilm also recognizes the vast majority of licensed works, such as Novels, Comic Books, the plot of Video Games and source material of Roleplaying Games (but not game mechanics or game-play details of a game) and such to be "C-Canon" (C for Continuity), and are considered to be "continuity" in that they are presumed to be true and be part of the Star Wars storyline unless George Lucas himself explicitly contradicts them (which he only does on very rare occasion, since he normally approves the material beforehand). There is an "S-Canon" category as well (S for Secondary) for a small number of sources that are hard to reconcile with the general body of Star Wars works, and are allowed into the Canon where they do not conflict with G Canon or C Canon, but are not authoritative where they conflict. Finally, there is "N-Canon", a shorthand for Non-Canon, such as stories like the Infinities and Tales series which told "what if" or humor stories set in Star Wars, but never meant to be part of the actual canonical storyline. Lucasfilm actually has people on staff specifically dedicated to keeping track of continuity and canon, and their policies on this are quite clear.

It's actually a common fallacy that Lucasfilm disregards everything but the movies, since even George Lucas himself got the name "Coruscant" from one of the novels, and Mr. Lucas has often vetoed concepts or plot events in novels he disapproved of (like a clone of Obi-Wan Kenobi in Heir to the Empire, which was changed to Joruus C'Boath at his insistance). --Wingsandsword 09:08, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Preview function is there for a reason

For god's sake, 67.171.180.209, use the preview function once in a while. It's there for a reason.

On my part I feel you are seriously misusing the idea of sections. If you turned the titles into sections just in order to provide bookmarks, I think I can do it much more elegantly, if you let me. Let me know. Aris Katsaris 04:44, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Did it. I removed the sections, put empty HTML markers with ids to make bookmarks. I think this looks more elegant, though ofcourse feel free to revert if you think the earlier version was better. Aris Katsaris 04:59, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Uncertain start of war

See Talk:Galactic Civil War

Because of the disputs as to when the Galactic Civil War begun and ended, the timeline has been changed so as to leave it ambiguous.

I agree with you that it is uncertain when the Galactic Civil War began exactly. But I also agree that the seeds of the war were planted with the fall of the Republic (Great Jedi Purge, Anakin becoming Darth Vader, etc.)

I reworked this section yet again (I hope no one does it again...for a while at least), but we will all have to wait until the release of "Star Wars Episode III: Revenge Of The Sith" to find out how it all finally fits together (we can only assume Episode III will have these events). Only after Episode III's release will we be certain when the Galactic Civil War exactly began.

Hiphats

Actually, we won't have to only have to wait for Episode III to know for sure, but for the Expanded Universe to fill in the gap between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope. It certainly wouldn't help us figure out when the war ended.

Now, I tried to not only leave it ambiguous, but to make to appear I wasn't trying to leave it ambiguous.

I think 1 BBY - 19 ABY would be a better range for the Civil War. I don't think we really need to include the Purge in this because a) It doesn't involve the "Rebel Alliance", only surviving Jedi, and b) It has its own section.

[edit] Er...

I find it hard to believe that Palpatine is younger than Qui Gon and Dooku. --Kross 01:57, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

George Lucas has explicitly said that Palpatine was approximately the age of Ian McDermid (the actor playing him) as of Episode III, so that one's straight from the man himself. Remember, in other parts of the Expanded Universe, like Shadows of the Empire, characters comment that Palpatine looks impossibly old for someone who isn't actually all that old. It was clarified in the Dark Empire comic series that his extreme channelling of the Dark Side was rapidly accellerating his aging and eating away at his body. --Wingsandsword 15:21, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] This page has been vandalized!

Warning the page is obviously vandalized!

Just search for words like: fart ass uncle incontinence damn, etc.

Someone please restore the order!

[edit] This is amazing

I never knew such a history and so many sidestories existed.

I wish I had billions of dollars so I could go throw it at George Lucas for the rights to Star Wars. I'd churn out quality movies so fast your head would spin .

[edit] This does not seem to be accurate...

22 - 19 BBY Star Wars: Clone Wars Aayla Secura and Ylenic It'kla track down a Techno Union scientist on Corellia. A Dark Jedi named Asajj Ventress meets Count Dooku and proclaims herself as a Sith. However after fighting with Count Dooku she understands that she is far beyond their power and wishes to join the Sith, so Darth Sidious and Count Dooku use her for their dark plan against Anakin Skywalker. Once she finds Anakin Sywalker, they engage in battle. It eventually ends when Anakin has Asajj bent over and he begins reaming her rectum with his light saber. As he asks her who her daddy is, she says you are and then dies from the anal assault. Trandoshan mercenaries capture the Republic Assault Ship Prosecuter and try to sell it to the Confederacy of Independent Systems. Republic Special Forces recapture it.

Anal (wouldnt it have been vaginal?) penetration by a lightsaber? "Who's your daddy?" WHAT!?

By the way, I remember some article with the actors of the original trilogy saying that Star Wars was just gonna be a sort of a fun adventure-y movie, and that the background stories and explanations of the SW cosmos did not originally have the depth that they have today. They added names to droids featured in the movie just for the action figures. And when Luke somehow manages to keep his perfect hair in the garbage room scene, and the actor asks how that is supposed to be believable, Lucas simply told him, "It's just not that sort of movie." I will give a link to this article as soon as I find it...

[edit] non-chronological

There seems to be an chronological error on the 25,130 and 25,200 dates.

Quoting the article:

c. 25,130 BBY - The reign of Xim the Despot begins.

c. 25,200 BBY - The Force is discovered by many groups across the galaxy, others dismiss them as mystic crackpots.

I'm not sure if they should be the other way around or if there is a typo.

[edit] Insignificant characters don't belong in the line

Pardon me but who really cares when Carth was born? Carth is less significant in the Star Wars Universe than George Bush would be to an Earth timeline, and I certainly don't see any reason for George Bush's birthyear to be listed on a timeline for our existance.

I suggest that we remove less significant character names/dates from the the main timeline, list out only the sub-plots on the main timeline.

Then is someone wants to, they can create timelines revolving around this sub-story. Character births can be added into those sub-timelines as well.

Why don't they belong? Is there a limit on the amount of entries? Do those people suddenly not exist in the timeline? This is a timeline of events in the Star Wars Universe, and characters births are events, and who cares if they're minor characters? Kuralyov 16:21, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Why not? In some people's opinion, Carth is of more importance than Han Solo, yet I'm sure you wouldn't object to his birth date's presence

[edit] 11-19 ABY

I noticed there is a big gap there, what's the deal? Plenty occurred in the expanded universe between 11 years after battle of yavin and 19 years after battle of yavin yet this has nothing between Jedi Academy & Hand of Thrawn/Vision of the Future, so is this timeline incomplete and still a work in progress? That part of the Expanded Universe has been rendered null & void by Lucas? What? LamontCranston 16:10 October 27 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are by definition always a work in progress. I think nobody has gotten around to filling that part in quite yet, if you wish to contribute there, go ahead. --Wingsandsword 06:43, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

For one thing, that section of history is fairly boring and disjointed (ie. lots of unimportant one-volume works. Asides from Dark Saber.) --Maru (talk) Contribs 22:14, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Well righto then. And I'd have to agree with Maru about that section of the history - although how on Earth can you say that Dark Saber is any better than Children of the Jedi, Planet of Twilight, Crystal Star, Black Fleet Crisis Trilogy, Corellian Trilogy and New Rebellion? :P --LamontCranston 12:41, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

New Rebellion. Utterly ignored (peculiarly, actually- Brakiss shows up again in the Young Jedi Knights but there appears to be essentially no overlap; if not for the common Imperial origin, one could be forgiven for wondering whether or not they are the same person). Crystal Star- so ignored it might not even be canon, and only two or three sentences anywhere else would be invalidated. Children of the Jedi- well, it is fairly important to Dark Saber, but Callista got pushed out of the picture pretty darn quickly in favor of Mara Jade, and I suspect we won't see her again, which eliminates the most important new element. Planet of Twilight? Ye gods, I do not think I have ever seen a single reference to that in one of the novels. Black Fleet Crisis, almost trivial. A few one-liners. Corellian Trilogy? A fair bit more important, but largely since the leader would later be of some importance in the NJO. At least Dark Saber had Daala savaging the galaxy, and eliminating most other Imperial factions other than the Remnant. --Maru (talk) Contribs 04:48, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

No argument with that detailed assesment of those books, except Dark Saber of course. :P --LamontCranston 02:34, 01 November 2005 (UTC}

No arguments there if you are referring to the literary quality of Dark Saber; however, I do think consolidating all the Deep Core Imperial forces, failing, and then effectively transferring the holdings and equipment to the Imperial Remnant- thereby eliminating most of the warlords, and reducing galactic politics to the New Republic, the Imperial Remnant, and regional powers, to be fairly significant. --Maru (talk) Contribs 17:02, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Outside of the West End Games & various X-Wing material practically nothing was done with the self-proclaimed Emperors, War-Lords, independent Imperial fiefdoms & et cetera. So to then suddenly have them appear in the books out of nowhere and then just as quickly and easily annihilated with their forces then consolidated and returned to the Imperial Remnant…is certainly something, but not significant. And can I just say that I can’t believe we’re ‘arguing’ over the merits of Dark Saber! --LamontCranston 07:35, 01 November 2005

Lol. Yeah, I think I will shut up now. --Maru (talk) Contribs 22:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Well hey, there's plenty of worse material we could be debating about: Holiday Special, Dark Empire I & II, Bounty Hunter 'Wars', New Jedi Order…the prequels --LamontCranston 14:14, 01 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I added entries for the eras and tried to mention the notable events of those years. The Essential Chronology is really your friend for that (especially since it ties it all together and helps you see things as a "big picture" instead of isolated novels). Not a whole lot happened, a series of political scandals in the New Republic, local crises, and the reunification of the Empire from being isolated warlords into more-or-less a reunified entity. --Wingsandsword 02:00, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ewoks cartoon

According to the timeline the Ewoks cartoon takes place 1.5 ABY, but on the Star Wars: Ewoks (cartoon) page, it is listed as 1.5 BBY. Does anyone know for sure whether it is 1.5 ABY or BBY? --Hotdoglives 04:19, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm gonna go ahead and change it to 1.5 BBY as is listed on the Star Wars: Ewoks (cartoon) page. It seems to be the most credible source. If anyone has another opinion, feel free to speak up. --Hotdoglives 11:16, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Podracing?

Podracing is invented by mechanic Phoebos c. 27,000 BBY, I think. What do you think? Henri Tapani Heinonen 06:46, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

What's your source for that? --Wingsandsword 07:11, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Well. It is canon that it was Phoebos, who invented pod racing, but I just guessed the point in time.

• c. 49,000 BBY The Infinite Empire of the Rakata is established.
• c. 28,000 BBY After a protracted civil war, a plague affecting only the Rakata causes the Infinite Empire to collapse.
• c. 27,000 BBY The first human colonists land on Alderaan.

Podracing must have been invented before (or during) the first human interstellar flights. Does anyone know, when were cars and aero planes invented in the Star Wars galaxy? The podracers are probably invented 100 to 200 years after that. Henri Tapani Heinonen 18:49, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

See [1]. Henri Tapani Heinonen 18:57, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh boy! According to [2] podracing is inventend only 132 BBY. How can this be? I thought that a podracer is easier to built than a hyperdrive or a lightsaber. What do you think? Henri Tapani Heinonen 19:03, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

It's not just about the technology. You need (1) anti-gravity and (2) Jet engines, and I'm sure both existed for thousands of years. But, when you say you "invented pod racing" it means you got the idea, "hey, let's make these vehicles that float with antigrav but are pulled along on cables by jet engines, then we'll race them!" I'm sure other types of races of a similar nature existed before that. When was baseball invented? We had the technology to make wooden bats, a ball, and leather gloves for hundreds of years before then. --72.20.152.138 18:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Origins of the Rebel Alliance

Does anyone know for sure when the Rebel Alliance is formed? It says on the timeline that it is formed 2 BBY... but I'm pretty sure that is non-canon. One of the Episode III deleted scenes shows the formation of the Rebel Alliance (does anyone know if that is considered canon, since it is just a deleted scene?), and the Rebel Alliance clearly exists 15 BBY, in the Droids series (once again, this show is not necessarily canon). I suppose this will be explained by the TV series and other sources in the future, but if anyone has any insights, please speak up. --Hotdoglives 11:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Nope- the Rebel Alliance was a slow congealing of a large number of disparate resistance movements, and so its history and its genesis is confused. The article for the Alliance has more on this. --Maru (talk) Contribs 18:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that deleted scenes are just that: deleted. That means that they MIGHT have happened, but there's no canon source that they actually did. I'd say, its ok to think they happened but if you have a book or any other level of canon that disputes a deleted scene, that it should trump deletions, just as with material in scripts that never made it onscreen. Deleted scenes are just shown for the fascination of the fans.

Aside from that, remember too that in that deleted scene Organa only said they were forming an 'organization' and then was cut off by Padme. He may have been refering to some smaller type of organization the preceeded the Rebel Alliance. So, actually both are compatible since the scene doesn't use the term "Rebel Alliance" --72.20.152.138 18:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Non-canon spin-offs on the Film Timeline

On the "Film Timeline" section of the page, is it really necessary to include the non-canonical "Holiday Special" and "Star Tours." One is a TV special that Lucas has expressed his completely rejection for, and the other is a freaking Disneyland ride. I feel that these should be removed. When I look at the Film Timeline, I want to see the films/TV shows that I'm actually going to see in my DVD collection. These two spin-offs don't belong. Any other feelings? --Hotdoglives 12:54, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Star Tours and The Holiday Special are canon and just as much a part of the Star Wars timeline as any other canon story. Jon Hart 02:52, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Year zero

Does a year zero exist in Star Wars? We have it listed, but most calendars today don't have a year zero. Thanks, -Xol 02:38, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

This has been argued about before. Yes, there is a year zero; yes, it is canonical; yes, it does in fact make sense; and no, just because the Gregorian calendar doesn't have one does not mean that a SW calendar must lack one. --maru (talk) contribs 02:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :). "Just because the Gregorian calendar doesn't have one does not mean that a SW calendar must lack one" - of course. -Xol 03:00, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. I probably could have phrased that better; all I can say is that it made sense when I was typing it. --maru (talk) contribs 03:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

That's alright, it made sense to me (but I guess my reply didn't make that clear - oops, sorry). I was merely clarifying that I was just wondering and not taking a side, as my first statement could be taken to imply. Thanks for such a fast response. -Xol 01:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I think it depends on how you calculate. Is "SW4"/"BY" a point or a year? If it's a point, then you end up with *two* year zeros. I don't know of any actual SW media that can be cited to determine what the creators' preferred system is. --DocumentN 18:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Early Dates

Many of the early dates seem quite contradictory. How is it that the "Jedi rise" (100,000) 75,000 years before the "Jedi Order is founded" (25,000 BBY). This also puts the Jedi way before the Infinite Empire, and Courascant is a full fledged city-planet during this Empire, is it?

The main offender seems to be cerca 100,000 BBY:

• The planet Coruscant is now covered entirely by its principal city, later known as the Galactic City.
• The ancient Sith civilization begins to develop on the planet Korriban.
• The Jedi rise.

I think that at least some of this needs to be fixed. -Xol 01:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I realy dont think this dating system is cannon.-Taracka

Well, this dating system isn't a cannon, a weapon you shoot at somebody, that's for sure. However, under the rules of Star Wars canon, as defined by Lucasfilm Limited, this dating system is definitely canonical. The ABY/BBY system is mentioned and used by George Lucas himself (G Canon), and it is used extensively and consistently throughout all licensed materials (C Canon). It's proven to be canonical. --Wingsandsword 03:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

The early speculative dates such the birth of the Universe and "Big Bang" should be excluded. There is nothing in the Expanded Universe to justify such dates or earth-bound theories. And in fact, the EU profers forth a rather different beginning as evidenced by Alan Moore's Star Wars Marvel tales (reprinted in Devilworlds) "Tilotny Throws a Shape" and "The Pandora Effect" which indicate that powerful mysterious entities such as Wutzek and Tilotny (although Tilotny itself seems likely to be the offspring of yet a greater being or beings) were at the beginnings of the universe and may in fact have have contributed to its beginnings (Wutzek is referred to as a "Force" demon and gives Chewbacca a vision of newborn galaxy.)

Uh, Devilworlds, like Infinities is definiatively not exactly canonical, while the vast majority of officially licensed material produced is canon under Star Wars canon, some things are obviously out, such as "what if" scenarios, irreconcilable events, and strange and bizarre events like "Tilotny Throws a Shape" have the "N-Canon" non canonical level reserved for them, so writers can make things that are Star Wars, but are outside the normal continuity. A quick google search for Devilworlds and canon shows dozens of sites, including ones at starwars.com all talking about how Devilworlds is either of limited canonical status, or outright non-canonical (for example, Devilworlds has a completely different story of how the Millennium Falcon was built and it's early history than every other source in the Expanded Universe, and it's version is pretty much universally ignored). The phrase "a long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away" implies that Star Wars is supposed to take place in the same general universe as ours, hence the creation of that universe as we understand it is applicable. --Wingsandsword 01:58, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Legacy of the Force

This link is wrong. The infomation on the next page has nothing to do with "Legacy of the Force" books July 4, 2006

Also the "three way war" is actully only 2, with the galactic empire and the sith allied against the galactic alliance. I'd change it myself but it might need more info.

[edit] The End of Life

Is the inclusion of the end of the universe really necessary?

1,350,000,000 ABY

• The universe suddenly collapses as a result of all matter becoming detached from gravity and

all life ends as it reverts back to what it had been pre big bang.

[edit] Star Tours

This does not take place 0 BBY as R2-D2 is aboard the Starspeeder at the time the "third" Death Star is destroyed, which we all of course know, there is no third Death Star. In addition, during the queue, C3PO comments on their "adventure" on Hoth in EpV, and well, there is no way it could have happened if this was in fact 0 BBY. Unless someone can show proof that the events of the current STAR TOURS takes place in the same canon as BBY/ABY, then I am going to remove it from this time line. --The Manator E 05:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tme2nsb (talk • contribs)

[edit] Formation of the galaxy

According to the Star Wars Timeline Gold The galaxy must be formed before 7500000 BBY, because according to the Star Wars Encyclopedia the Yavin system was formed 7500000 BBY. --Qaywsxedc 16:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

7,500,000? Are you sure you didn't leave some zeroes out? Thats seven-and-a-half-million, right? I only ask because, that's not very long... Our solar system is 4,500,000,000 years old, and our galaxy is something on the order of twice that age, like 10,000,000,000. Dissembly (talk) 01:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

You are right, I forgot a few zeroes, the right date is 7,500,000,000. --Qaywsxedc (talk) 19:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Time measurement in the Star Wars galaxy" - reference to "Earth days/years/etc"

The current "time measurement in the star wars galaxy" paragraph doesn't make much sense, and it's not clear what the author was trying to say. At the moment, it has a list that goes, "1 Earth month = 7 weeks = 35 days" and so on like that. It can't be trying to say that one month (Earth time) is equivalent to 7 weeks in Coruscant time, because next it says "1 Earth week = 5 days". In which case one Earth month would be 20 Coruscant days, not 35 Coruscant days, because we all know that one Earth month is made up of 4 "Earth weeks".

I suspect that the word "Earth" should be replaced by "Coruscant" in that list, so that it read "1 Coruscant week = 5 Coruscant days", since it clearly can't mean "Earth week/month/etc.." without creating logical contradictions all over the place, but i am reluctant to change it because i am not familiar with the mythology at all. Maybe Coruscant's timekeeping system was devised by an idiot? Who knows? -Dissembly (talk) 01:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I have changed it anyway. I cant see how the original author could have meant anything but "Coruscant week = 5 days" etc..etc... If I am wrong, then I call upon the person who corrects my edit to include some sort of explanation for the bizarre loopiness of time being described. Trust me, it would be an interesting addition to the article, even if it's just "George Lucas got drunk one night when he came up with the system." - Dissembly (talk) 01:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

This section doesn't work even after you change the Earth years to Coruscant years. In one place a Coruscant day is given as 43 hours of 23 minutes each. Later the same day is listed as 18 hours each lasting 69 minutes. When the battle of Yavin takes place, Luke is supposed to be 19 Galactic Standard years old. That works out to only 16 and a half Earth years. Mark Hamill certainly wasn't so youthful looking. Even if you accept a pubescent Skywalker, 43 hours of 23 minutes and 18 hours of 69 minutes are somewhat incongruous. Perhaps the author meant 54 hours of 23 minutes each, which is at least the same period of time? If there were citations for these figures it would be useful. Jesustonia (talk) 02:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)