Talk:Detailed Timeline of Events in Magic

Should this be merged with Timeline_of_Magic into just one article? Joe P. 16:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Originally, I didn't think so, but given how close in format the pages are looking, I think it would probably be best. However, you would know better then I would. Either way seems ok. If you decide to, I would suggest leaving Early History on the Timeline of Magic, removing the last entry of Early History (the 1584 entry) And then starting the 1500s there. Lucas Cray 18:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to do what you think is best. I appreciate the work you are doing on the timelines. I was just trying to figure out what the difference between the two were. They both seemed "detailed". I'm fine with either, as long as there is not a lot of duplication between the two articles ( and that they are linked two together). Joe P. 18:24, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Also, if you run across anything you think is interesting, feel free to add it to the Template:Did_you_know so that it shows up on the Main_Page! Joe P. 18:32, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Okay, so sometime in the near future I'm going to transper all the information from detailed timeline to the original timeline. Later I may need help with deleting the page, but when I get there, I'll give a shout. Also, I was wondering, as I create more and more year categories should I not create cateagories that won't have anything listed or should I coutinue to create them to provide a framework for later developement. Ex. There were no magic books published in 1599 Should I have created empty category or left empty link? Thanks, Lucas Cray 04:43, 12 December 2009 (UTC)