Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH:First canon use of the BBY/ABY system
This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. Advanced Jedi Training Droid 6 (Talk to my master) 01:00, February 4, 2016 (UTC)
It looks like the first canon use of the BBY/ABY system will appear in the upcoming "Jedi Master Magazine," as can be seen on the preview pages showcased here. --LelalMekha (talk) 16:37, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- You're going to hate this answer, but how can we really treat that as a canonization of the dating system when the same page says that Darth Maul died in Episode I? - Brandon Rhea(talk) 16:40, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- Ah! I hadn't even noticed that. Oh, heck, why would they even do that? -_- Never mind. --LelalMekha (talk) 16:43, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- Wow. That's not even simply Legends, that's a step back in time, given that Darth Maul was revealed as having survived that well before the canon/Legends split. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:28, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- What kind of game are they playing these days? They're trying to drive us insane, surely. --LelalMekha (talk) 20:34, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- I would note that the Lucasfilm Story Group isn't perfect at their job. Ultimate Star Wars said Nahdar Vebb was killed by Gor, and remember when they accidentally mixed up Zuckuss and 4-LOM, the destruction of the Imperial Palace, when the Executor was called the Eclipse, etc? Also, ABY was used in Star Wars: Card Trader. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 21:17, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- I'll also say what I've said many times before: this sort of thing is not written for the Wookieepedia audience or for the documentation of canon. I also sincerely doubt that this magazine, which is written by another publisher, goes through any Lucasfilm Story Group vetting. That's not what their job is. So we really need to calm down about this sort of thing. Just ignore it and move on. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 21:37, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- Quite frankly, I'm thinking the whole timeline split is turning out to be a huge mistake. I get it, they want to avoid any continuity hiccups thanks to the Sequel Trilogy, not to mention Rebels and the like, but the problem is there is no real distinction right now, since we've got Rebels-related references like Lothal for Imperial Handbook, the FFG-related stuff is using stuff from primarily legends sources and are just now including elements from the canon works (and even then, with the obvious exceptions of those elements related to The Force Awakens and the Sequel Trilogy, they still somehow managed to incorporate a lot of legends-related material), and there's plenty of other things that LelalMekha and others pointed out. Heck, even the whole rule of any works that are released after April 2014 are automatically designated Canon instead of Legends, even deleted material from otherwise Legends material like the cancelled unaired episodes of The Clone Wars and the Blu-Ray deleted scenes, doesn't really work since, aside from the conundrum that the FFG-related stuff has, we've also got the Imperial Handbook, which despite being released and being primarily in development well after the April 2014 timeline split announcement, was still designated as Legends. The whole BBY/ABY dating system's just the tip of the iceberg, especially when they most likely had it outdated due to the split. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 11:05, November 29, 2015 (UTC)
- That's only a problem when you view things through a Wookieepedia lens and try to fit products into continuities. Some products exist in the meta, where they're just comprehensive about any and all Star Wars lore and aren't designed to act as sources for a wiki. For whatever reason, that's something people here haven't been totally able to grasp yet. And the whining about it from some circles (not saying you're whining, Weedle - you're not) is incredibly self-important. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 14:48, November 29, 2015 (UTC)
- Star Wars: Card Trader seems to mention 3 ABY on one of R2-D2's cards as the date of Return of the Jedi. --Clonehunter(Report your W.M.D.) 00:52, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
- It's already been indicated before that we should probably be wary of Card Trader's canonicity. See this thread. ProfessorTofty (talk) 00:04, January 4, 2016 (UTC)
- Star Wars: Card Trader seems to mention 3 ABY on one of R2-D2's cards as the date of Return of the Jedi. --Clonehunter(Report your W.M.D.) 00:52, January 3, 2016 (UTC)
- That's only a problem when you view things through a Wookieepedia lens and try to fit products into continuities. Some products exist in the meta, where they're just comprehensive about any and all Star Wars lore and aren't designed to act as sources for a wiki. For whatever reason, that's something people here haven't been totally able to grasp yet. And the whining about it from some circles (not saying you're whining, Weedle - you're not) is incredibly self-important. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 14:48, November 29, 2015 (UTC)
- Quite frankly, I'm thinking the whole timeline split is turning out to be a huge mistake. I get it, they want to avoid any continuity hiccups thanks to the Sequel Trilogy, not to mention Rebels and the like, but the problem is there is no real distinction right now, since we've got Rebels-related references like Lothal for Imperial Handbook, the FFG-related stuff is using stuff from primarily legends sources and are just now including elements from the canon works (and even then, with the obvious exceptions of those elements related to The Force Awakens and the Sequel Trilogy, they still somehow managed to incorporate a lot of legends-related material), and there's plenty of other things that LelalMekha and others pointed out. Heck, even the whole rule of any works that are released after April 2014 are automatically designated Canon instead of Legends, even deleted material from otherwise Legends material like the cancelled unaired episodes of The Clone Wars and the Blu-Ray deleted scenes, doesn't really work since, aside from the conundrum that the FFG-related stuff has, we've also got the Imperial Handbook, which despite being released and being primarily in development well after the April 2014 timeline split announcement, was still designated as Legends. The whole BBY/ABY dating system's just the tip of the iceberg, especially when they most likely had it outdated due to the split. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 11:05, November 29, 2015 (UTC)
- I'll also say what I've said many times before: this sort of thing is not written for the Wookieepedia audience or for the documentation of canon. I also sincerely doubt that this magazine, which is written by another publisher, goes through any Lucasfilm Story Group vetting. That's not what their job is. So we really need to calm down about this sort of thing. Just ignore it and move on. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 21:37, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- I would note that the Lucasfilm Story Group isn't perfect at their job. Ultimate Star Wars said Nahdar Vebb was killed by Gor, and remember when they accidentally mixed up Zuckuss and 4-LOM, the destruction of the Imperial Palace, when the Executor was called the Eclipse, etc? Also, ABY was used in Star Wars: Card Trader. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 21:17, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- What kind of game are they playing these days? They're trying to drive us insane, surely. --LelalMekha (talk) 20:34, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- Wow. That's not even simply Legends, that's a step back in time, given that Darth Maul was revealed as having survived that well before the canon/Legends split. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:28, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
- Ah! I hadn't even noticed that. Oh, heck, why would they even do that? -_- Never mind. --LelalMekha (talk) 16:43, November 18, 2015 (UTC)