This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. The result of the debate was Support; Four digit BBY/ABY years (1000-9999 BBY/ABY) should have their comma omitted. JangFett(Talk) 17:50, November 13, 2013 (UTC)
The following was discussed recently in IRC. Cavalier One noted that most, if not all, recent sources omit the comma in four-digit year articles. Example: 5000 BBY instead of 5,000 BBY. Some textual examples from some of the most prominent recently released sources:
Note that sources do include the comma for years of five or more digits. Examples:
New Essential Chronology, pg xi: "100,000-25,000 BBY"
Atlas, pg 3: "Following the first of the Alsakan Conflicts after 17,000 BBY..."
Warfare, pg 25: "The navy would become a tool of the Pius Dea theocrats after 12,000 BBY..."
However, Wookieepedia currently employs the comma for four-digit year articles. See 5000 BBY. I suggest we mirror our formatting after these official sources, which would mean omitting the comma for years 1000-9999 BBY/ABY and using the comma for everything 10,000+ BBY/ABY. Obviously, this will require some extensive article moving. Hopefully, a bot can assist.
The following statement can be added to Wookieepedia:Naming policy#Years and plain numbers: "For in-universe year articles, omit the comma for years 1000-9999 BBY/ABY (Example: 5000 BBY, not 5,000 BBY). Do include the comma for all years 10,000+ BBY/ABY." Naturally, this will also apply to our in-line article writing for uniformity. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 22:30, November 5, 2013 (UTC)
One more note, as was just discussed on IRC: This only applies to the BBY/ABY dating system, not to other dating systems, such as ATC/BTC or GrS. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 22:41, November 5, 2013 (UTC)
I've always found "5,000 BBY" and the like to be counter-intuitive, for the reasons Cade mentions below. I think Del Rey is right to abolish that practice and use something more akin to real-world practices. (And we would be, too!) ~Savage 13:39, November 7, 2013 (UTC)
I'd just like to point out that in the real world, years use this exact system. Four-digit years, such as 2013, are presented without commas, while years that have five or more digits include the comma, such as 25,000 B.C.E. CadeCalrayn 22:43, November 5, 2013 (UTC)