This seems rather useless... and it's going to be a pain reverting it. *sigh* --Imperialles 09:33, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Is this what happens when I'm gone for half a day? -- Riffsyphon1024 13:10, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Since when is organizing things useless? - 67.171.180.209

It's not useless, however you did not tell us that you were going to do this, and as an anonymous user, you will raise a red flag when making such changes. -- Riffsyphon1024 22:02, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'll remember that next time. - 67.171.180.209

Another problem is that the years do not coincide with the dates listed in a majority of (if not all) other sources (edit: I also think it would be a prudent course of action for you to register to this wiki) -- Falmarin 22:46, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I got my information here and here. Since the New Jedi Order era was listed as ending in 30 ABY and the Legacy era as starting in 37 ABY, I listed the years in between as being both, but, seriously, what would you have done?

The Rise of the Empire (1,000 - 0 BBY); this dating system implies that during those 1,000 years that an Empire was on the rise - weren't these 1,000 years of peace? -- Falmarin 01:51, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It should be Rise of the Republic. -- Riffsyphon1024 11:56, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, not really, Riff. The Republic was established some 25,000 years BBY, so that's technically the Rise of the Republic era. --Imp 12:08, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Then this whole damn thing is messed up. -- Riffsyphon1024 12:19, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The "eras" the anon refers to are OOU eras, used to categorize books. --Imp 12:24, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If we we're staying with this "era system" a more accurate title would be "Republic Golden Age" or "Era of Republic Peace," especially from an in universe perspective; seeing as how these 1,000 years were of supposed peace. -- Falmarin 00:14, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Look, I didn't come up with the names for the eras. All I did was organize the years by them, okay?

Right; but it should be labeled as the "golden age" or something - especially considering that it was 1000 years of peace until the last. Anyways my point was that periods in time are far from being concrete with a LARGE number of conflicting sources making the categorization iffy. I'm not trying to take you down or anything and I realize that it must have taken quite a bit of work - but at this moment I don't think that the categorization of eras has yet fully matured with Lucas Licencing. -- Falmarin 19:56, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• I dunno where users are getting their dates from, but the few I've been editing are all wrong. Most births and events are two or three years out, and some births appear to have been made up without any verification or source. I suggest using the TimeTales timeline over at TF.N or Nathan Butler's Timeline Gold at starwarz.com for the correct dates Kwenn

Interesting. I've personally been extremely confused by birth dates and event dates in the star wars universe. It would be prudent to check with multiple sources (as well as double and even triple checking the sources) before listing dates for such things. -- Falmarin 00:17, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)