i was fed up with not finding all the stuff that starts in PoF and having to look (and know) that parts of it are in Ghassan, other parts in Ashen Order and the rest in no timeline at all.

Yes, it may be duplicate information in many parts but we have a timeline for afaik every large outdoor zone so any new visitor will expect a "PoF Timeline" and have a hard time to find that information.

Still some work needed on formatting and adding references

Hope you agree on this step ;-) --Xinturaia 11:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I think it's fine. I've been looking for this information too and even if there's overlap, it's still of immense use to users. It think this will be a great addition.--Kodia 11:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm happy with this change too. In fact, I think we should retire the Ashen Order Timeline. That page was one of the original pages on eq2i, written by Ewil, back when eq2i was just a spoiler site for DoF only. Now that the timelines are mostly zone-based, I would rather just have a Pillars of Flame timeline only. -- Sassinak 17:34, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

could do that easily as it would be only a merge of the rest of Ashen order Timeline in to PoF and removing the links - so if everybody agrees with that just let me know. Imho it would make sense to have only Zonebased Timelines or "real" questline timelines (liki Claymore, Collections, Courts and alike). If we agree on this maybe the Ghassan the Trader should also be included into the SS timeline? --Xinturaia 09:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I pasted the first half of Ghassan into the Sinking Sands Timeline, to match what you've done with the PoF Timeline. I also pasted the first half of Peacock Timeline into the Maj'Dul Timeline, since it is based in Maj'Dul. Ghassan and Peacock can still have their dedicated pages as secondary references, since they span multiple zones. However, the Ashen Order takes place in a single zone and really doesn't need its own page. I removed Ashen Order Timeline from the Solo Timelines diagram already. Sassinak 17:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that's a better compromise. One thing that's been bugging me though, regarding these timelines and the occasionally associated timeline info boxes. It's a little tough sometimes though to see how they will evolve. It's difficult for us to come up with some reasonable standards for the timeline infoboxes (because SOE has changes how they handle these "funneled quest series") and I would hate to see users start to think that the hugely long timeline boxes are the way to go. I firmly believe they are not unless they're for something greater, like Claymore or Cloak of Flames.--Kodia 17:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

you are probably right but i love the boxes for the ease of navigation - so i would not want to miss them even in some of the simpler ones. --Xinturaia 20:05, 16 September 2008 (UTC)