The timeline is not mine, I just translated it. Again: it's taken from the print version of the Reasons of State tie-in comic. However, I do believe it's the closest currently to an official one for the games since it was published after the release of TW2. So, looks like the pogrom was retconned into having taken place in 1265.
If you speak enough English to read them in that language, diligent fans have translated all of the books; you can find them here.Charza said:
English is not a problem 
I've read "last wish" and "blood of elves" which are the only two "official" translations.
I also know that "Time of Contempt" is on it's way.
These books however aren't very specific with dates or an overall timeline.
I don't know if the other books are though.
I'm going to check out that link, and start doing some catch up, since it seems I have to do a lot of that.
I've read "last wish" and "blood of elves" which are the only two "official" translations.
I also know that "Time of Contempt" is on it's way.
These books however aren't very specific with dates or an overall timeline.
I don't know if the other books are though.
I'm going to check out that link, and start doing some catch up, since it seems I have to do a lot of that.
Sapkowski is mostly interested in telling his story; he doesn't care that much about timelines. It's the FANS who get obsessed with timelines.Charza said:
Have fun!I'm going to check out that link, and start doing some catch up, since it seems I have to do a lot of that.
In the Witcher Wikia, there's some errors too. The Thanedd coup 1264, one month later Geralt leaves Brokilon to start looking for Ciri. Then 1268, the battle of Brena start and end. So, Geralt spent 4 years looking for Ciri?
iirc, it was tops 1 year. Geralt and his group couldn't travel further due to the winter, but they resumed their trip in spring and it didn't take much longer to find her.valkimedes said:
Ah well... thanks. Best gratitude ever after spending months of contribution.Charza said:
Could be one good reason to contact the admins there and expose your point. You can do on Game Widow talk page.
As far as I know, most of those pages has been compiled by the fans and book saga readers, Game Widow and Ausir included. I can't guarantee tho for the timeline.
Nevertheless, it's true that lately the contribution has become huge thus a bit confused. I've noticed many non-registered users editing, adding mess on mess, and since Game Widow is the only resident admin there (Ausir contribution is not constant) it's impossible for her to watch closely to every edit made. When I see a mess in a page, I correct, but as I said it's impossible to do on all the pages.
So if anyone of you has a better information about the timeline and other things, I encourage you to help. Better if you create an account on Curse.com (The Wiki is moving to there).
My apologies, I never meant to insult anyone, and my criticism wasn't directed to anyone in particular.secondchildren said:
I didn't mean to say all of the wiki was a mess, because that's simply not true.
Yet as you also state yourself, the quality of some of these wiki pages is questionable at best.
This timeline page for example lacks sources, and when you check out the "Talk" page there is nothing there.
This probably means that the information on that page was placed there by contributors without any kind of quality control.
Now thats a shame, as it makes this information very unreliable.
I'd love to contribute to these pages myself, but at this moment I'm still reading some of the books. (The official translations, and fan translations.) So at the moment I feel I'm not going to be a very useful contributor.
I mean this talk page: http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Game_widow
The talk page is made for people comments, suggestion, rants etc. If there is none is becoz no one has anything to say or have not even notice that timeline page. So if you have queries, comments.... any idea on your mind, I encourage you to add there. Game Widow is kind and friendly and will be glad to answer. For a quicker reply, I suggest you to use the talk page linked above.
As for the timeline issue in general: Corylea spoke well imo. If it's so confused is becoz Sapkowski himself never paid too much attention in it. Probably becoz it has not so much sense, I mean it has none for him neither for the story. It has for the fans.
The talk page is made for people comments, suggestion, rants etc. If there is none is becoz no one has anything to say or have not even notice that timeline page. So if you have queries, comments.... any idea on your mind, I encourage you to add there. Game Widow is kind and friendly and will be glad to answer. For a quicker reply, I suggest you to use the talk page linked above.
As for the timeline issue in general: Corylea spoke well imo. If it's so confused is becoz Sapkowski himself never paid too much attention in it. Probably becoz it has not so much sense, I mean it has none for him neither for the story. It has for the fans.
Most of the adventures of the witcher actually happen over larger periods of time.
Sometimes a year is stated, but most of the time this doesn't matter, since it's only a small part of the backdrop.
The war with nilfgaard is something that looms over the north, but since Geralt travels a lot, it's influence changes.
One thing is clear though, the timeline on the website doesn't make sense, and this has nothing to do with Sapkowski or his books.
Sometimes a year is stated, but most of the time this doesn't matter, since it's only a small part of the backdrop.
The war with nilfgaard is something that looms over the north, but since Geralt travels a lot, it's influence changes.
One thing is clear though, the timeline on the website doesn't make sense, and this has nothing to do with Sapkowski or his books.
Yet it is a mess, due to lack of interest on that part of people who play the games besides a few. Too many character articles are stubs barely containing any information besides the journal entry. I've done my share of editing on Roche's, Dethmold's, Iorveth's, Henselt's, Letho's and Siegfried's pages but the reality remains there.
I think it a travesty that trash like Dragon Age and Mass Effect have such complete wikis whereas TW has such an incomplete one.
Good! Well stop complaining then and go to edit! Hey ooooohhhh....CostinMoroianu said:
I won't do that. Not that I don't care about the wiki mind but my desire to help it went out the window the moment I saw it's a place where one can shamelessly promote his youtube videos to get views. I realized this when I saw the videos on Henselt's page and I thought "Hmm, only vids of Henselt's death so I'll put my own where he lives" but then saw that one person had youtube videos for the follow pages Letho, Stennis, Henselt, Forgotten Vran Sword, Loredo, Radovid, Foltest, Operator Staff and so many others, all by one person.
To some I guess he's just another contributor to me he's just a shameless promoter of his own videos using the wiki to attract views and I find that disgusting and as long as such is permitted I will have nothing more to do with that wiki.
To some I guess he's just another contributor to me he's just a shameless promoter of his own videos using the wiki to attract views and I find that disgusting and as long as such is permitted I will have nothing more to do with that wiki.
You mean CJake3? I am not sure about that to be honest. I can only speak for myself, that when I went searching for walktrhough videos, I found tons of that with the speaking voice which are not welcomed into wiki. The only HD videos I found (without any silly speaker) were those by CJake3. So eventually it was a necessity. I am not sure if I promoted this way CJake3 channel. But it's true that his HD videos has no challenge. They had, I mean, I don't know if there are other now, it's a long while since I checked on YouTube.
Regarding your critics: I agree, that mountain of stubs is annoying. I edited a few of them and totally re-wrote them into the it-Wiki I'm administrating. But it's also true that most of the secondary characters in W2 have no story at all. Not like in W1. You could easily write an article about the Fisher King or the Bootblack. But what can you say about Spark? Cedric? Derae? Falas and Yolna?
Anyway, afaik, Game widow is much more less active that she was on W1 wiki. And seems there is no substitution.
Regarding your critics: I agree, that mountain of stubs is annoying. I edited a few of them and totally re-wrote them into the it-Wiki I'm administrating. But it's also true that most of the secondary characters in W2 have no story at all. Not like in W1. You could easily write an article about the Fisher King or the Bootblack. But what can you say about Spark? Cedric? Derae? Falas and Yolna?
Anyway, afaik, Game widow is much more less active that she was on W1 wiki. And seems there is no substitution.
Minor characters that have no real role in the story and who barely speak don't deserve a page, but I'm talking here of major characters.
EDIT: Furthermore a wiki is to be supposed to be neutral. How is it neutral when for the longest time the only videos on Stennis's or Henselt's pages were with their deaths? ( and still remains the case for Stennis )
I would argue they aren't a necessity at all. It's one thing to have official developer trailers and vids but another to add videos by a random person to the wiki that aren't walkthroughs for a quest or special in any way since the only thing they show is a short moment in the game. Mass Effect wiki doesn't do it nor does Dragon Age wiki. Say what you will about their games but those wikis are proper examples on how to organize and maintain good wikipedias.
EDIT: Furthermore a wiki is to be supposed to be neutral. How is it neutral when for the longest time the only videos on Stennis's or Henselt's pages were with their deaths? ( and still remains the case for Stennis )
Well, a few of us have been contemplating the timeline for a bit now, and thinking about all the possibilities.
But so far we've seen nothing from CDPR themselves.
Are they aware of the issues ? Can we ever expect an official explanation on some of the dates that they came up with ?
But so far we've seen nothing from CDPR themselves.
Are they aware of the issues ? Can we ever expect an official explanation on some of the dates that they came up with ?