Talk:Timeline of Lord Byron

Initial comments
While I appreciate the work that went into this, I'm not sure that this is an appropriate wikipedia article. Perhaps its content could largely be merged into George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron? john k 22:56, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * It could be merged into the main article, but that is already quite long. Byron inspires fascination in many people, and this chronology is, I believe, the only one in existence on the Internet. Therefore it may attract serious Byron scholars to use Wikipedia, something that they otherwise might not do. Surely to have such a chronology available is a good thing. I'm interested in why John Kenney is not sure that this is an appropriate wikipedia article. Surely since wikipedia will never be finished one can't gainsay that there won't be all sorts of appropriatenesses as yet undreamt of. It's always better to add than to take out. People don't have to read this chronology if they aren't interested, but it's there if they want it, quietly and harmlessly spinning away on a server somewhere occupying negligible space! Matt Stan 13:21, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Well, a timeline is not something which is generally found in an encyclopedia. Particularly a timeline of someone's life.  Most of our articles are either on specific topics, or are lists of other articles on a given theme (or what not).  This doesn't really fit in too well.  I'm not going to argue too hard about this, but this doesn't really seem like an encyclopedia article. john k 16:59, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * See List of themed timelines. Suggest you take this up with the contributors to those articles too if you're right about timelines being unencyclopedic. Matt Stan 20:54, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It's information, it's encyclopedic. Why not do what we do for history articles---have a section called 'Biographical timeline' or the like, with a note pointing here (though it should be "George Gordon, 6th Baron Byron (chronology)", to be consistent) and a short summary of the most important events? grendel|khan 09:14, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)

This is great work, please keep as is. SomeGuy 9/6/06

Indeed - agreeing with those who favour it - it makes people who are researching a person a very good idea - perhaps timelines for ALL major people might be of use - this would then help cross reference with other articles according to dates etc. Thing more for literary criticism and context but obviously beneficial for all academic pursuit? Crescent (talk) 14:49, 12 July 2011 (UTC)