What do you think about splitting up Casey Blevins and her alter-ego Danielle Clarkson? After Morning Glories 29, it's starting to look like these characters are existing simultaneously. Keeping them separate will let us segregate appearances of Casey from Danielle, and prevent Casey's page from becoming really really convulated.
She was definitely created in 16. We can then construct a biography starting from that chronological point. I think we can just remove those Clarkson sections from Casey's biography, and just add a link to the Clarkson page.
I feel like "Casey" is defined by the physical body that entered and exited the cave. There is a portion of time where she has past memories.
"alt-Casey" is from #14 to whenever. To keep it simple, we can quietly assume that the fake passport Hodge gives her was for Clarkson and thus Clarkson also starts here (as Zergrinch wants). Otherwise, we need another term for the Casey that exists from 1998 (age 16) to the first confirmed Clarkson reference (which is sometime before 2010 (age 28) since Danielle and Tom have a relationship by then).
So Casey enters the cave in #14, lives a life as Clarkson (link to Clarkson page), exits the cave in #27 with future memories, is mindwiped by the cylinder and lives on.
I wonder whether Clarkson is physically transformed back into the Casey that exits the cave. A crackpot theory is that it is just a mental copy that is put into cave Casey's head. Danielle could be growing old with Tom in the "real world" past the point where the copy was taken and thus it's just a simulation of "Clarkson" that is destroyed by the mind wipe. It also means that cave Casey doesn't necessarily know everything that Clarkson knows.
I find it interesting that in #28, Hodge is still motivating Casey by talking about her parents. Would the Clarkson from Issue 29 be willing to give up everything she had (a husband, a baby, a good life) to save parents that died 13 years ago?
Alternatively, maybe it's that alternate history that is the sacrifice Casey made to the cylinder: David is "unborn" and that's why he's all ghostly. He's trapped between existences, he's Schrodinger's kid. And since Clarkson never was, the memories are gone. . .
The Casey we have back is actually much older than her 16 years old, and is Clarkson who traveled back to her younger body (and conveniently forgot everything that happened)
Clarkson has now split up from Casey.
The first one is the more conventional application, but Spencer was never conventional, was he?
In any case, whether Clarkson is part of Casey's personal chronology still, or is now a separate entity, a split off article will greatly help in reducing confusion. Imagine if current Clarkson and current Casey appear in the same scene -- how the heck are we supposed to write that up in Casey's bio, assuming they were merged? :P
I don't think Clarkson's dead, BTW. Perhaps at some point she'll be subject to time bastard, and disappears entirely, leaving Tom and David all alone. But I think for now she's a separate entity.
P.S. Time bastard theory is unique to fans of the Japanese role-playing game Chrono Trigger. Still, I think it might be applicable anyway to the type of narrative Spencer wants to have.
How does #2 work? The Casey that entered the cave is the same one that exited (with implanted memories) and it was a copy that appeared back in time? Or that the Casey in Clarkson's school will not go to MGA and thus not go back in time leaving two Caseys in the "real world"?
I would write it up from the POV of Casey's perceved timeline
young casey-> (age 15) AP Physics Casey -> (age 16) MGA -(Cave)-> 1998 (age 16) army base -> (age 19) Abraham date -> (age 28) Clarkson -> Clarkson lives her life with Tom and David -(time travel)-> Clarkon's mind in young Casey's body -> Mindwiped by cylinder -> post- cylinder events.
So shared experiences are written up twice: once with the information of the mentally younger Casey and later with the information of the mentally older Casey. Issue 14 is the Casey/Clarkson divide and issue 29 is the Clarkson/Casey divide. Thus it's always a Clarkson interacting with a Casey no matter what their relative information is, two sequential loops.
Can you explain time bastardism without references to a game whose timeline I'm not familiar with? I'm not familiar with chono trigger, but it seems to be that this theory depends on a traveller going to a time point prior to his own birth, thus triggering a different person than himself to be born.
Why would Clarkson be dead? Or do you mean the Clarkson whose memories Casey has is (is not) dead?
It doesn't have to be time travel before your life. Let me illustrate:
Let's say Hunter goes back to the past, when he was 2 years old.
For fun, he sneaks into his house, and puts head removal cream all over his 2-year old self, and returns to the future. So now, Hunter grows up bald.
What's going to happen when Hunter returns to his time period? Will he suddenly turn into bald Hunter, with all the experiences and memories of growing up bald, or will he retain all his pre-time travel shenanigans memories and appearance and meet up with his bald self?
An easy answer might be to use the way J.K. Rowling depicted time travel in Prisoner of Azkaban, which is a fixed interpretation of time as opposed to time being fluid and malleable. If you haven't read Harry Potter, it basically states that a time traveller who travels back in time will not change anything, because he has always travelled back in time. Our Hunter example conflicts with this theory. Hunter could not have grown up with hair, because he was bald since two. He was bald since two because he has always travelled back in time to when he was two, and made himself bald. There is no instance where Hunter was not bald since age two - a nice stable time loop.
Would examples from other comics help us?
DC Comics operates on a policy of quasi-fixed and quasi-fluidic time. Some events are "crystallized" in the timestream (such as Barbara Gordon being shot by Joker), and operate more on a stable time loop principle. In other times, a time traveller can indeed radically change the course of the future. Sometimes, he is immune from the changes he made, and returns home to a different world. Other times, he is affected immediately (if he kills his own grandfather). In any case, it's quite messy.
The Marvel Comics portrayal of time travel is much cleaner than DC's. It states that if you travel back in time and change the past (say, by killing your own grandfather), you create a new dimension where your grandfather is dead. Changing events in the past won't change your own future, because you can't travel across dimensions. This deals neatly with the grandfather paradox of time travel.
Time bastard theory averts the grandfather paradox in a different way. It states that you cannot duplicate matter and violate the conservation of energy. That means that two of you cannot exist at the same time and point in your personal life (you, meeting up with an older you, is still ok).
So if Hunter goes back to the past and makes himself bald, a bald Hunter grows up in the new timeline. But -- at the point of the original Hunter's departure -- he winks out of existence. He has become a time bastard.
The Hunter that changed his past returns to his time with hair and memories intact - he is immune to the changes he himself made, but everyone's going to wonder how he regrew his hair.
In your bald Hunter example (thanks for this BTW, it's very clear), the bald Hunter just goes poof when hirsute Hunter originally went back in time? Does it require that bald hunter was also preparing for time travel? Otherwise, how does hirsute hunter get back? If he's carrying the time machine with him (e.g. back to the future, the time machine, time turner, TARDIS, time belts, etc.) then the returned Hunter has the time machine, but none of the equipment/materials/fuel to build it. If the time machine is stationary (The beast's time cube, Doom's time platform), then the time machine isn't even there for him to return to.
If we instill the restriction that the bald Hunter also plans on time traveling at the same point and to the same point (i.e. he does everything that hirsute Hunter does with the exception that he does not have hair). Then the following scenarios occur to me:
1) At the point of his time travel, bald hunter disappears and the original hirsute Hunter appears in the "two year old time point". The timeline is resolved. I assume this is what is meant by "time bastardization". Parsimoniously, it means that whatever hirsute Hunter does to bald Hunter's timeline doesn't really count *as long as bald Hunter goes back in time properly* but that is a strong restriction. How does time bastardization deal with timelines that are so altered the original time travel never occurred?
2) Two Hunters appear in the past. All hell breaks loose. This is a reasonably common trope and IIRC this has been seen in Marvel (age of Ultron) and Artemis Fowl.
3) Bald Hunter is the only one to appear in the past, he "overwrites" hirsute Hunter. This implies that someone else triggered all the changed that the hirsute Hunter had done originally.
of course, there's option A) Messing with the timeline splits the universes (Abramsverse): If hirsute Hunter travels forward to bald Hunter's future, there will be two of them, if he travels to his own future, he will be the only one. This lifts the restriction on bald hunter also building a time machine though.
As for the Marvel thing, how does that accord with the whole "age of ultron" event? A character traveled back in time and induced a change in the past, the character's original future was deemed unreachable (he was forced into the alternate future), and the only way he got back to a version of the original future was to go back into the past and invoke a "it has always been this way". Accordingly, in "all new x-men", a future version of a character disappeared when his past-self was briefly critically injured. It's not neat since this has caused damage that's the basis for Hunger. Actually, Marvel's kinda time travel crazy right now. . .
It seems like Nick is hinting strongly at the Rowling/12 monkeys model: Casey has always been Clarkson and was instrumental in orchestrating her own past. Of course, he has explicitly said that he plans to subvert time travel tropes, so who knows what he's going to do.
Interesting that as far as we can tell, the time machines are stationary, not mobile. Actually, the only "time machine" I'm really counting is the cave. Everything else works in the context of the academy and I'm becoming convinced that time doesn't work properly there (Issue #25,#28). Current theory is that it's a time bubble of some sort and can be manipulated in subtle or gross ways. I don't know what was up with the portal of light Hodge stepped through, but I'm not saying that was a time machine without more evidence.
Hmm another thing is that the flashbacks might not be all from the same world. Could it be that some of them are from a "non-time travel Casey" timeline and some are form a "time travel Casey" timeline?
I guess what I'm still confused about is "Clarkson has now split up from Casey" is what Clarkson and what Casey we are talking about. There are at maybe two Clarksons:
1) The Clarkson in the original timeline that was Casey's AP physics teacher and wrote her a reference letter to MGA. She is not Casey and this timeline was not time traveled into. So the theory would be that the "Clarkson" that was mentioned by Casey's mother in Issue 16 is not the same Ms. Clarkson that we see now (i.e. Casey). Accordingly, it was someone else that summoned Abraham away in issue 11 and who recruited Irina in 30, and told Casey about the "the hour of our release draws near".
2) The Clarkson that is Casey in Daramount disguise, the only Clarkson that we know anything substantial about.
As for Casey, I count two points of emergence (issue #14 and Issue #27) and one point of departure (Issue 14). We're assuming that the departure in #14 led to the emergence in #14. We do not know where the departure for the emergence in #27 came from. All we know is that (at least mentally), it was after the emergence in #14. Physically, she can't be more than 18 which still narratively works for a physical transfer (i.e. it's an 18 year-old Casey that leaves the cave in #27). Of course, that raises the question of where the 19-28 year old Casey/Clarkson we see comes from. Is it a universe split? Are you suggesting that the Clarkson we see will never go back into time (either physically or mentally)?
Okay, this essay only addresses the first part of your question. I will type up the later parts in due time.
The Time Bastard theory depends heavily on the Time Traveller's Immunity (TTI) theory. The latter states that a time traveller is always immune to the changes he might make while time travelling.
So let's make a few examples in our Hunter tale to drive this home.
Hirsute Hunter invented a cosmic treadmill that allowed him to travel back in time. Bald Hunter, teased as he was, never did. Hirsute Hunter will still pop back to the original time he travelled from -- even if logically he had no way to do so in the revised timeline. If his time travel device is portable, and time travels with him, it is also protected by TTI. If it was a device powered by some ginormous machine made by original him, it never existed (so Hirsute can't travel again, but retains the knowledge of how to do it).
Hirsute Hunter, instead of just making himself bald, travels back in time and kills his great-great-great grandfather. He doesn't wink out of existence. in the new timeline, his family doesn't exist, and nobody knows him. But he's still alive, and is immune to the changes he made.
Bald Hunter got so depressed that he kills himself at age 10, hirsute Hunter will still be alive.
Bald Hunter was so emo that at age 12, he unleashes a thermonuclear war that renders the whole planet an inhabitable wasteland, hirsute Hunter will still be alive (but not for long when he returns).
Bald Hunter becomes so dangerously unstable at age 15 that Casey warps back in time to kill him at age 4. She succeeds and returns back in time. In the new timeline, bald Hunter was killed at age 4, and everyone except Casey won't know who Hunter was. One year later, hirsute Hunter pops up, presumably giving Casey a big shock.
As the original time traveller, hirsute Hunter takes precedence over any subsequent versions of Hunter that also try to time travel.
Let's say bald Hunter was motivated to fix his condition and travels back in time at age 15. He takes a hair growing formula, and bathes his 3 year old self in it. In the new timeline, hairy Hunter will grow up, and at the age of 15, wink out of existence and be overwritten by bald Hunter. Bald Hunter, on the other hand, will exist until age 16, and wink out of existence and be overwritten by hirsute Hunter. So if you were Hunter's father, you would see him turn bald suddenly, and a year later, regrow some of that hair.
Let's extend the impact of TTI to actions of future time travelers to prevent the original act, instead of trying to correct it.
Casey, in order to prevent Bald from killing the world, travels back in time and intercepts Hirsute as he tries to make his 2 year old self bald. She kills him, and returns in time. In the new timeline, Hunter grows up normally. The new version of Hunter is overwritten by the time travelling version (though both are functionally identical). It doesn't matter that Casey killed Original, because her action was in response to his time travel shenanigans. TTI kicks in for original, and keeps him alive. He of course won't have memories of Casey killing him, but does have memories of travelling back in time.
Zoe, in order to prevent Bald from killing the world, travels back to when Hunter was 1, and kills him. Hirsute, when he emerges from his portal, is the original traveller and is protected from TTI. This means he still sees the original timeline, and is able to apply hair removal cream to his 2 year old self. When he returns to his present, Hunter has been dead since age 1, but Hirsute will still exist.
Bald is motivated to regrow his hair, and travels back in time when he was 15 to watch over himself as a baby. He sees Hirsute emerge from a portal with hair removal cream, and kills him. Mission successful, he goes back to the future. When he turns 16, he winks out of existence, replaced by Hirsute (who was protected by TTI).
TTI doesn't kick in if another time traveler, who isn't there in response to Hirsute's actions, interferes with the act. Let's say at the same time, a time-displaced Casey was hanging around the Hunter household. She sees Hirsute emerge from a portal with the intent to make the toddler Hunter bald. She fights and kills him. Hirsute is dead, permanently.
Because the principle of conservation of energy no longer kicks in (the original is dead), I'm not sure what happens to Hunter, assuming Casey tells him what happened. Will he wink out of existence at age 16, doomed to try to kill himself and die trying, or will he live his life as normal? I am personally leaning towards the former, to be more consistent.
The main purpose of TTI and Time Bastard is to avoid the grandfather paradox: if you travel back in time and kill your grandfather, you won't exist. If you don't exist, you can't go back in time and kill your grandfather. So now you exist, and you travel back in time to kill your grandfather.
Wow, thanks for that. That was an excellent write-up of time bastards.
Does this only apply to "boomarang" time travel (i.e. you always return to the point which you returned to). If not, when does the time bastard disappear, at the departure or arrival point of the original (assuming that the arrival point is after the departure point)?
I find it fascinating that time bastard is so dependent on intent and perception. So if Hunter is not a time traveler and Casey goes back in time and accidental hits the one-year old hunter with her car, when she comes back, hunter has been dead since age one right? But if at the same time Hunter travels independently back into the past, even if he doesn't interact with the time-displaced Casey, he gets immunity and pops back into existence. However, if Casey's trip happens after Hunter's trip, is he still immune? He *pop*'d back into existence after his trip (satisfying TTI) only to be wiped out by Casey's trip. Or does it not work that way?
If Hunter is not a time traveler, and a time travelling Casey kills baby Hunter with her car, Hunter would be dead since age 1. There will be no time immune Hunter because he was always killed by Casey.
From Casey's perspective, she went back in time and committed infanticide. From everyone else's perspective, Hunter died tragically in a hit and run accident when he was one. Casey will have memories of Hunter, but nobody else knows him.
But, to complicate it a bit, lets say at 9 AM Hunter travels back in time to say hi to his mom. At 9:30 AM Casey travels back in time and inadvertently flattens the baby. I do believe that in the new timeline, Hunter is dead since age one. But having passed through a time portal, he gains time traveler immunity, and will still be alive when he returns.
Now, what if Casey leaves first? Then Hunter would never have time travelled, because he was killed at age one. He would not have gained time traveler immunity.
The theory is kind of arbitrary in the sense that whoever time travels first, essentially wins.
But if Hunter goes back at 9am, doesn't change anything, then returns at 9am (boomarang time travel) then the timeline is stabilized (indistinguishable from a non-time traveling Hunter timeline). When Casey goes back at 9:30 and flattens the baby, does Hunter still gets the protection? Or does a single trip through a time portal make you immune for the rest of your life?
According to the theory, when he traveled in time, all of his personal history and knowledge became disconnected from the timeline. So yes, Hunter is protected from any alteration that would prevent him from existing. But this protection only comes from future time travelers (like Casey, who traveled 30 minutes afterwards).
While he is immune from being wiped from existence, he isn't exactly immortal. For example, if Zoe stabs him in the chest after he returns from his trip, he's still going to die.
Also, it's only his personal history that's immune from the timeline. If Casey, for example, inadvertedly cause a nuclear holocaust to destroy the United States, a Hunter who boomerangs back would basically see a nuclear wasteland. If Casey's alterations resulted in America losing World War 2, then Hunter would return to a world where everyone speaks German.
Offhand, I would suggest a slider, with cover images of the TBPs and hardcovers. With either links to the relevant arc/season or its purchase page on Amazon/Comixology/Image.
Alternatively we can expand the Character portals into a third row, since there are new characters added to the mix already. I mean, your own Locke and Key character portal is already reaching it's fifth row, so why not have a third here...?
I don't think adding a third row will be that damaging. But the question is, do you want the front page to basically be a portal to ALL of the characters (with more than a bit part), or only the most important characters?
For example, we can arguably add another row to Staff to accommodate Mr. N, but we can also cull Headmaster (who hasn't really appeared), Nurse Nine (she hasn't done anything in ages) or the deceased Reginald Gribbs.
By the way, if you want to replicate the sections I did here, I documented the necessary templates in my Profile here, under Front Page Elements.
We should see what Cal and Upguntha think...part of what I like about the current layout is the groups of six look really polished. I'm not sure how we could add to extend the main column without losing the look of it.
Gribbs is toast, but we should still probably feature him prominently with the rest of the faculty since he's had a reasonably significant role in the events so far. For Other characters, we could probably squeeze Tom in there somewhere
At the risk of sounding presumptuous, I would like to request for elevated access so I can do additional edits to the Mediawiki pages. The front page right column has a lot of dead whitespace, and I would like to try and minimize that if I can.
The type of changes required will require a lot of tweaking. And you've seen my editing style - there's a lot of trial and error involved. So this is certainly something I'd rather not embark upon if there's a considerable delay between testing, modifying, tweaking, and troubleshooting.
I'm doing some mucking around in Morning_Glories_Wiki/Character_portal and need your help to make the visual elements look right. I have no access to the CSS files, and need you to insert the following code for me:
. . . Isn't that what is meant by "All character biographies are written using the past tense. All episode and comic synopses are written using the present tense"? Lets clear that up before I do any more edits. I don't want to do a bunch of work and then have to revert it all!
well, at least three of us agree on the more formal style, (no I, You, the reader). I'm pretty flexible about the details, I just need to know what rules to follow. Zergrinch just copied over the YJ guidelines and they seemed reasonable.
how does the marvel wiki do it, that's who you were using as a template, right?
I was mostly following Marvel's for layout, categories, and referencing. I see the value in experience (as someone who has very little), but I think we need to figure out what's best for this wiki's purposes. I think that the comics section of the Marvel wiki are more relevant to ours as a medium, and the Lost wiki for the storytelling.
I'm fully supportive of consistent regional spellings, tense, and no breaking the fourth wall for in-universe articles.
My concern is that I don't believe some of the suggestions that have been made so far will actually work well.
Separating outside info with a banner indicating that it was explained by a reliable source rather than coming from the comic seems redundant to me. Since SO much of this series is based on speculation and deductive reasoning, every article is going to be broken apart a dozen times. Conversely, YJ is a tv series AND a comic, based on 20-year-old existing material. It has a lot more foundation--and I imagine, a lot more concrete sources of information--than MG, and is presented in a way that's a lot less open to interpretation.
I strongly disagree with the need to reference specific pages and panels in articles. I could see the value of including them in image files, but I just don't think it's necessary as a whole. Marvel's comic sections just list the issue, linked, as we've done. Conversely, Walking Dead's wiki will occasionally list the issue and page, but the vast majority of information in the comic sections is completely unsourced.
I like the idea of the time and location stamps, but again, I don't think it will work for this series. We get very few concrete indicators, and the ones we get are so close together it's gonna look messy. Issue 8 happens on I think Day 10, but we don't know what, say, Ike was doing during that time, so should he have a different header? The Marvel wiki uses Story Arc names as the headings whenever possible, then umbrella terms for unnamed, significant periods inbetween. (eg, on one page, it has "Quest for Magik" (which was a story arc), "X-Force" (which was a team/series name, and "Necrosha" (another story arc). The Magik section detailed the character's involvement in that arc, X-Force section had info on how he joined/participated in that team, then Necrosha detailed his involvement in the arc.
As far as issue synopses go, I think it would be most coherent to separate the flashback and current events, rather than list them as-presented. That's how info it's done on the Lost wiki, which uses flashbacks in a very similar way that MG does.
For now we're a really small community, and I'm open to different approaches, but you and I have built the bulk of the content, so I'd like to know what you personally think.
Speculation banners: Yes, the Canon/not canon/speculation issue has turned out to be far more troublesome than I could have anticipated. I think the major issue is whether we need to label non-canon sources (speculation and creator information) without using phases like "there is a suggestion" or "perhaps the same" or "the creators have confirmed". I personally like using the "fudge words", it is easy to write, it flows well in context and clearly labels the speculative/out of universe thoughts.
However, I can see how it can be perceived as a less formal way of proceeding. As a concession to that, I've been playing around with ideas on how to deal with it without being too disruptive. I do think that having another page (like the lost wiki) is too much. The banner every time there is a non-canon thought would be too much as you said. Right now, that leaves us with colored text and quarantining the "bad thoughts" in a separate section. The quarantine has many of the same problems as the separate page idea, but at least it's on the same page and is a bit more integrated. The colored text is the least disruptive, but suffers from the "rainbow brite" problem, especially if we distinguish between reader speculation and creator-confirmed information.
Specifically about creator-confirmation: since there is actually a lot of it, I feel that anything that fits obviously in the narrative (e.g. Megan is taken directly from the burning camp to the Academy, the truants are adopted into families to prepare for the institute, Casey is more untrustworthy than we think)can be stated without the fudge words (but maybe a citation to the interview). Something like "Megan is the blond girl when Abraham is calling out names" requires fudge words and a citation. But again, this may be insufficiently formal for the wiki.
Panel citations: I was wavering a bit before, but now that I've seen it implemented in Recurring Phrases. I think that it's ugly. It is also a PITA to do (I have a hard enough time remembering which issue; having to count pages and panels too? Ugh). I agree that if it's deemed important, the information should be attached to the image like this
Time and location stamps: I agree. Since the timeline is kept purposely vague and people from different time points are interacting at different times, trying to set a "global timeline" is not going to work. I mean, the Academy is very likely in some kind of "time pocket", how are we supposed to deal with that?!
I like using the story arcs as time markers. Maybe we can allow grouping of arcs? PE-Truants- (and supposedly "tests") are really one big story and should be treated as such.
Issue Synopsis: The difference between lost flashbacks and MG flashbacks is that in Lost, it's always(?) a complete story being told in flashback. MG flashbacks are often a series of disjointed scenes that have a common theme, but not a common narrative (exceptions being in the second arc). There are also often tonal links between adjacent present and flashback scenes so they are more meaningful as-presented. Maybe do the flashbacks in grey or italics to differentiate them from the "present" narrative so there's a visual distinction?
That being said, it's not really *that* important to me. How about I write up two versions of MG21 (the truants issue) and we'll see how they turn out?
Spelling: There's a spell check in the browser, people (including me) really need to use it more. Letting a "rough" edit into the wild is fine, it's more important to get the thought out than to get it perfect, but the words should be, well, words.
Preview, summary and minor edits: we're getting to be a pretty mature site, I think that the minor edits box should be used more often. It will help us sort out the major edits from the stream so that we're not inundated. We should also get in the habit of summarizing our edits so that we don't have to "compare edits" to find out what the others have done.
Infoboxes: Only "major" characters should have one. It's weird when the infobox is bigger than the writeup.
Colors: Ok these are really minor points but I don't like the blue, can we make it a morning glory purple or the maroon they use in the study hall? Same with the green in the nav bar? and can we change the wallpaper to something less busy? Even if it's just the wallpaper from Issue 1?
So that's what I personally think. For the most part, I'm acutely aware of my inexperience in these matters so I've been keeping a bit more circumspect. Instead, I've been trying to post potential solutions up in the forum in an attempt to spark some discussion and consensus. I've been trying to limit my opinions to where they are directly relevant as opposed to flailing them around indiscriminately . (You know what they say about ideas and assholes. . . )
Part of what I'm thinking about is that Morning Glories is going to be at least an 8-year project, so I want to make sure that the decisions we make now don't cause chaos a few years later.
I like using the fudge words too, I find they don't break the flow apart as much as other alternatives might, especially when there's one every paragraph or so. I'm not sure how well a separate section might work, when the topics being discussed might be incredibly disjointed without having to reestablish the context of the scenes.
As far as future issues go, we can't know (the series wasn't the time-travel-extravaganza it is now when the wiki was started)
The flashbacks are presented strangely, but I think they're at least all in chronological order (possibly with the exception of the Casey Spy Hero scenes from 26). We could maybe try headings, (three years ago, two years ago), or if that's too disjointing, include it as part of the synopsis itself, (three years ago, a year later). What do you think?
On the Timeline of Events page, there's all the events I could find with "confirmed" timestamps. There's a lot I didn't include, that happened, "between 1-2 years ago", etc.
The wallpaper pretty much is what is at the moment because I couldn't get a higher quality image to load properly on it (the max file size is ridiculously small). Take a swing at it if you want. It's somewhere in the admin panel.
Your opinions are relevant, that's why I keep coming to you. :P
Also, redid the character list on the main page. Take a look?
Having the glories will definitely be more relevant than having a greenhouse, but maybe you wanna get something not from the cover? The more realistic look characters have on the cover, as opposed to Joe Eisma's art, makes them look very much "off" in my book.
BTW we have definitely deviated from Links in References! Sorry!
I get what you mean about the cover art...overall I definitely love the interior design better, but the covers are still beautiful, and the kind of "pin-up" design might be a good decoration to keep in rotation. Maybe there's something we can do with Joe Eisma's cover for 27? It's got every significant character, and it's kind of awesome:
For that I think we'd have to throw the characters on one side of the screen, then maybe a logo or something on the other? I don't think there's a good way to split that one in two, with the way the characters are grouped...
Some other possible Eisma sources at theinteriorpages,
We may want to move discussion into a common area like the forum or a community page, there are a few things we probably need to coordinate on as a group and these scattered wall posts are probably not the way to do it. . .
I did something weird to the nav bar: I changed the category name from "object" to "objects" and changed the code for the nav bar accordingly. Now only "cylinder" is showing up, even though when you click it, all the objects show.