|WikiProject Time||(Rated Template-class, Mid-importance)|
Time is a pretty vast subject, and it's impossible (or, at least, very unwise) to try to group all of it into a single template. A cautionary lesson is the defunct Template:Culture of China. It ran on for hundreds and hundreds of links, but the articles were better served by a few interlocking templates, which they enjoy now.
My intent is to build a loose hierarchy of Time templates. There will a good deal of overlap, especially regarding calendars.
I have no absolute goal in mind for the templates, and expect Wikipedians to edit them to suit. A general goal is, of course, to make articles on Time more accessible and interrelated.
- The Time Portal will display all the templates.
- Don't duplicate Template:Calendars, which is very concise and useful, into another template. Calendar topics are bound to show up in several Time templates, but none should be a list like the one in the Calendars template.
- Individual articles should preferably have just one, and no more than two or three Time templates. There may be exceptions, but the goal is to resolve clutter and confusion, not create it.
- Let the Geology editors work out their own Era templates. This may well apply to other disciplines; it's enough to link to chronology and overview pages about time in various disciplines.
Cheers, Yamara 23:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Chronology vs. Chronometry 
Chronology is the science of locating events in time, and is served by this template.
Thus, historic and paleological events are chronology, but methods to measure and determine seconds, hours, years and centuries are chronometry.
There is a lot of overlap in these subjects, as one relies upon the other. Even their Wikipedia articles at this writing are underdeveloped in explaining the difference.
When updating or altering these templates, please bear this in mind. Cheers, Yamara 23:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Restore discussion page 
I have removed the redirect to Template talk:Extra chronology, as that deals with a different template related to music. There needs to be a place to discuss this and other related templates dealing with chronology and time.
In my opinion, I'm seeing an excessive proliferation of overlapping templates. This one is old, well-established, and deals with a well-defined range of topics. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 19:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, the Chronology template, as a subtopic of Time, is only about a week and a half old, and is the same as Chronology Topics. I was encouraged by another editor to meet the Wikipedia standard of no caps starting words after the first in titles (and templates) and was in the process of painstakingly changing it from "Chronology Topics" to "Chronology topics" when I discovered that the "Chronology" template was essentially open, since the music template had moved on.
- I was planning on CSD'ing Chronology Topics, since I've already replaced them in all articles with this identical template. --Yamara 20:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
BEGIN COPY FROM OLD TALK PAGE
Talk copied (not moved) from Chronology Topics' talk page: 
Note on the creation of the Chronology Topics template 
My intention is to create another cross-referencing template for Time, which will cover units and methods of measurement, (like years, months, etc. and clocks, horology, etc.) but will also list the most general of Chronology topics, since Time supercedes Chronology in concept.
This template, as it now stands, will need adjustment and editing as its development and range of coverage develops. -- Yamara 18:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
History and Archaeology 
Your template is an interesting idea, but please remember that many of the articles you've been flagging are concerned with questions of archaeological and historical chronology, which only interact tangentially with your stated concerns with time and timekeeping. As you say, it will take a while to sort out how these things fit together. At this early stage, I'd be especially cautious about removing categories from articles before we've worked out how they fit in the broader scheme of things. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 05:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I wrote in haste; Disregard what I said above. I now see the scheme you've established includes the historical sections and that you were deleting links, not categories. Nice job. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 05:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I have murdered a lot of redundant See Also lists in this little project, but Categories I mostly add, leave alone, or alphabetize if I'm really bored. A cue that a template is necessary comes when one discovers a messy set of See Also links across a wide series of articles that no one else has noticed are broadly related.
- Case in point, my first, and only other, template: Template:Space opera serials 1930-1960. I was originally just looking up a couple time travel shows from the period (Captain Z-Ro, Brick Bradford), when I noticed an uneven string of See Alsos leading back and forth randomly among Flash Gordon, Buck Rodgers, etc. I have no wild affection for the period genre, but I could see there was an intuitive classification there that other editors were stumbling towards. This is Wikipedia at its best, discovering a new consensus of information without original research.
- The Chronology article was such an unhelpful embarrassment, I felt I had to make a start somewhere. I'm under no illusion that I know enough about any of these subjects to write authoritatively about them, but I believe this template enhances the ability of these chronological disciplines to speak to one another. -- Yamara 09:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
END COPY FROM OLD TALK PAGE --Yamara 20:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)