Talk: Ghostbusters Timelines

Ghostbusters Wiki talk:Ghostbusters Timeline is to address all issues in regards to the Timelines, which was created and updated by Mrmichaelt.

---

Things I Thought I'd Bring Up About the Timeline

This is a pretty exciting project, cataloging all the historical events. Can't wait until we catalog the Ghostbusters' adventures.

I also have a theory explaining the contradiction with the origins of Halloween. It could be that when Boogaloo and the worst of his demons and spirits were banished, the people only remembered them through rituals and traditions for their own spiritual beliefs and it had nothing to do with Halloween. In 7th century Ireland, Samhain forced his worshippers to use these rituals and traditions for his own celebration, effectively creating Halloween. It's not much, but it is the best I can come up with to compromise the difference of When Halloween Was Forever claiming Halloween originated in 7th century Ireland as an annual ritual in honor of Samhain and The Halloween Door claiming the holiday was created as a deal to get rid of horrible spirits 2,000 years ago. This is pure speculation, but I also think Samhain may have been a servitor or friend of Boogaloo and intended to make Halloween last forever so he could be released. None of these theories may be acceptable, but I do what I can with my knowhow. SonofSamhain 12:17, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

• Interesting theory. I did like the idea that Halloween origins were esoteric and dealt way back before Samhain in the 7th century nor Parentalia. But in the scientific field, Halloween is generically connected to them. But as for an in-universe solution, Samhain being a servitor is a neat idea. All this time, I figured he was just a usurper and filled the void left by Boogaloo. Mrmichaelt 01:24, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

Ideas as the Timelines Gets larger

The pages are getting larger as time moves forward and I think we need to consider splitting the timelines up. Here is one way to do it (Star Trek:Alternate_Reality), however Star Trek (memory-alpha) only covers "Canon" to the Star Trek universe. But the idea I want to lift from them is splitting the pages by time into say 3 sections or whatever. I say name the sections like the following:

• Ghostbusters Wiki:Ghostbusters Timeline (All Canon)/Millions of Years Ago-1910 A.D.
• Ghostbusters Wiki:Ghostbusters Timeline (All Canon)/1914 A.D.-1990 A.D.
• Ghostbusters Wiki:Ghostbusters Timeline (All Canon)/1991 A.D.-Alternate 20th to 21st Century A.D.
  

Anyways, that is one of many ways to go about doing it. Note, where to separate is also your call (Mrmichaelt). This is a suggest. I have had trouble reading through the timelines as of late because they become too cumbersome. This would act to make the section easier to digest. I also suggest throwing a "few" images in there to give the pages more flavor too. I image every two page scrolls down or so. Things to break up the timelines a bit, and make them easier to read. This is all suggests by me and this is still all for Mrmichaelt to decide and no one else.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  03:12, December 23, 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad you brought this up. I've been wondering if we should scrap the All Canon and rename it as a Sanctum of Slime Canon. The purpose of All Canon was to to try and fit everything in but once IDW came along, it doesn't all adhere anymore.

• But basically, the proposal here is to further split each one into three articles total? I have to think about it.
• Images? Have to think about it, too. I never considered it because it is a timeline and links to articles with images in them.
• Also, just as a status update on the project: the only Timeline that will be added to on a consistent basis come late January, when edits for Issue #1 of the ongoing are a go, is the IDW one. The Prime Movie Timeline is 99% done, I'm mulling over one or two more entries. The Animated Timeline is 99% done, too.

So there's my one proposal and I'll think about the two I addressed. But with it being Christmas and New Years, I probably won't make a decision and/or take action until after the holidays since it is a big change. Mrmichaelt 07:41, December 23, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, this isn't a urgent matter by any means. Yeah, address it sometimes after news years is what I say. No hurry.

As for the idea of renaming All Canon as the Sanctum of Slime Canon, not sure if you should. I think the point of the "All Canon" was for better or worse try to with every effort place all important parts of the "Canons" together. It may border on fanon at times, but there is a strong interest in that point of view as it seems. Also, isn't Sanctum of Slime canon with the comics anyways? From where I see it, All Canon is a tricky thing to build, but the interest in it seems strong still. Seems as long as people still enjoy RGB, there will be a interest in trying to include them with present canon. I always have found it silly, that ghostbusters comics and the films tried to hide the cartoons under a rug. 140 episodes and all they want to count is 2 films and 2 games? That is lazy on the comics part. Sorry, I didn't like that factor. And they ain't the first either. 88mph did it and only used the first move (recanoned 2004) as canon. The All Canon has many reasons for being there as I see it. But this section and all in it is yours to change as you see fit. It is your call how this goes down. But from my perspective, I don't see this comic/game based universe lasting more than 3 years tops. I know the belief is that Dan and Harold will honor the game, which will allow the comic to be "ok" maybe, but I doubt it. Film was the main canon, and I doubt Sony cares as long as the movie happens. Bill I doubt will focus on anything canon other than what happened in the first two movies (and mostly the first movie), and Harold will back out in favor of Bill's thoughts. (He has a few times in other projects already.) Dan will be left only giving a nod to the game, like Slimer and Ecto-1(a) in gb2. Sorry to be pessimistic, but the troop in my book are going to do the same before if the third even happens. The IDW comic line seems to be something of a moment, but so was 88mph and so was the game. We gotta think about the long range here a bit too. Anyways, sorry to rant so much, but actually I don't like the thought that the film boys may ignore what is being built here. But I see based by previous film, the trend is ignore everything but fellow films.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  15:36, December 26, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll keep All Canon around.

• They've never said Sanctum of Slime is canon. The prime universe according to Sony is the two movies and Ghostbusters: The Video Game. That's what has been dictated to IDW, they have to follow that directive. Nothing lazy about it. Tom Waltz said there'd be "some Sanctum of Slime tie-ins" so more than one. But Tristan Jones also said "There may be nods every now and then to those things, but Sony want this set in the "prime" era, anywhere around the movies and first video game. This unfortunately rules Extreme out (to an extent) and Sanctum of Slime (to an extent as well)."
• I'm fine with some canons existing separately in one big Multiverse of parallel universes so I'm not too concerned with what's given a nod and what's not in the third movie if it is made. They all exist no matter what. Mrmichaelt 03:41, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

"They all exist no matter what." So True. Sorry if I come off strong here. I need to personally check over recent events with the comics to know for myself If SOS officially got thrown out. I was unaware of it. I did find it confusing that Winston is not a doctor and the whole Slimer in a tank scene in the comics. It seems the video game is "only somewhat" canon to the comics. I think my head hurts. I know you been over this issue months ago, but it has bothered me. Anyways, I don't know if a split between The comics and SOS would be logical "now" but if they do anymore of that, we might as well call the comic its own canon and split it off. I don't like the idea tho, even as I think it. Thats the reason why your in charge of the timelines, I think you have a better head on your shoulders about these sort of things. I got a bit too much "angry fanboy" in me. lol.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  04:06, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

No worries, we all have a strong passion for Ghostbusters. Yes, TVG is "only somewhat canon." Basically, Burnham said things that happened in TVG is canon unless it is directly contradicted in the comic hence Winston isn't a doctor and Slimer is still off-and-on remanded to the PCRT.

So far I've only seen a SOS tie-in in #1 and it's not something that contradicts SOS. The benefit and confusion with SOS is that it takes place in an ambiguous present (The 2000s in my opinion) so its hardly likely to be contradicted but its still not accepted as the prime universe. But I've been meaning to ask about it again since four issues have come out now and we have a better gist of IDW's timeline. Mrmichaelt 04:24, December 28, 2011 (UTC)

I just took a good read thru 3 and 4 of the new comic series.... Stunning. I really move to call the comics they own canon at this point. They worse than the RGB were. This is clearly its own canon, and makes no mistake about it. Equipment is being reused in different ways in the new comic book series, but it get straight forward crazy the RGB references in it. This comic series is confusing from a canon standpoint. I honestly don't see anything to debunk SOS but that is the least of our worries it seems. Ghost bomb grenades indeed. So are traps in 1997 still Megatraps?! sigh.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  04:14, December 29, 2011 (UTC)

The references in general are pretty nuts. Dan Schoening is a mad genius. If you haven't, take a look at the lists I posted on GB Fans or IDW Forums.

The Megatrap was based on a toy that came with a deluxe Kylie Griffin figure not the actual trap from EGB. The canon is only confusing if you can't separate from things actual appearing from just a reference that a hardcore fan would recognize. I don't want to get too much into it since that's spoilers talk. But I feel I've got a good handle on it come January when we can start editing. I've got all images and articles waiting on a drive for the most part and a list of what needs to be done so it should be smooth sailing. Mrmichaelt 04:48, December 29, 2011 (UTC)

One thing I'm not finding in the threads in any of the forums is what the name of Winstons pack he used in the 4th comic was. I know what it looks like, but have they said yet anywhere?  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  05:11, December 29, 2011 (UTC)

No, they haven't said what to call it yet. I'm guessing volume may help so please ask on the IDW forum's talkback thread for #4. ;) Mrmichaelt 05:20, December 29, 2011 (UTC)

Timeline(s) Bio images

To make a image of a timeline to put on the main page? I think a image may help a bit.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  09:48, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I'm at the tail end of The Other Side edits so I'll be online a bit more, and I can check out the image. Mrmichaelt 10:14, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

I'll see what I can come up with. I fell asleep last night when you wrote this I think. I think a cool design would look something like this. The color lines being different timelines. Note the idea is a quick image that suggests timelines, not the actual perfectly done timelines.

I can't view that image, I get a 403 error. Mrmichaelt 08:16, January 17, 2012 (UTC)

link to page image is on. Odd the link to the image still works for me. But here is the web site address.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  08:25, January 17, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I'm fine with something like this image on the main Timeline page. Mrmichaelt 08:39, January 17, 2012 (UTC)

draft 2

First draft. Thoughts and fix ups to be made?  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  11:27, January 18, 2012 (UTC)

Looks great. Only suggestion is added a "S!" (for Slimer) between RGB and EGB. Mrmichaelt 04:10, January 19, 2012 (UTC)

Added slimer cartoon and did some minor color changes. Trying to make it a bit more readable and colorful.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  09:55, January 19, 2012 (UTC)

Can we make that gray line for All Canon something else? It sorta meshes too much with the black verticals. Mrmichaelt 02:16, January 20, 2012 (UTC)

3rd draft. I think we may have it now.

Would Yellow work?  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  02:23, January 20, 2012 (UTC)

Let me see the yellow, and I think it'll be that or the 3rd draft you just posted. Just want to be thorough and consider both. Mrmichaelt 02:34, January 20, 2012 (UTC)

No hurry, I have the photoshop file ready to edit again, if anything looks off.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  02:36, January 20, 2012 (UTC)

I also interested in making bio images for all four timelines. I want to use the main images to make those. I make a mindmap (example link) which would use the colors and all that. I may also make a simple template infobox for the bio images too. But I like your approval of a image and to do the two things I just spoke of here.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  03:16, January 26, 2012 (UTC)

Sure, fine with me. Mrmichaelt 04:31, January 26, 2012 (UTC)

Then did you end up approving the 3rd draft? Gotta have one image ti start from.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  04:44, January 26, 2012 (UTC)

Oh, no I didn't. Looking back, looks like I was waiting to see the "All Canon" strip in yellow. Mrmichaelt 04:59, January 26, 2012 (UTC)

Bio image of IDW canon

Ok I need to know if this is working.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  02:17, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

We know Ghostbusters: The Video Game is semi-canon. Erik Burnham noted such (for example, Winston doesn't have a doctorate in IDW and...well other things are spoilers that can't be mentioned here). So we need something in place of a straight line for TVG such as a squiggle line. Mrmichaelt 04:18, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Return of the Statue of Liberty in timelines

This image is at the end of the movie in the credits but it shows the events clearly

• Weeks Later: Mayor Clotch commemorates the return of the Statue of Liberty to Ellis Island and awards the Ghostbusters with their second Key to the City.
  • This event was listed in the Ghostbusters II script draft of the film but not mentioned in the movie. Accepted as canon because this does not contradict any established continuity.

I think its canon cause it can be seen in the credits at the end of the movie. Also is it canon that it was Ellis Island? Because in real life its Liberty Island technically (Link). Sometimes, Ellis Island is grouped with Liberty Island as they are next to each other, but I think its Liberty Island.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  11:48, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it should be Liberty Island. It was on the to do list but I was too tired last night and still had to double check the usual drafts and other sources before editing the three timelines again. At most, I'm going to accept the "Weeks Later" part of the drafts as canon and the ending of the movie acknowledges the event itself as happening. Mrmichaelt 04:19, January 30, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, looking over the Storybook, Script Draft, etc., it was completely my error to have typed Ellis Island instead of Liberty Island. It is plain and clear listed as Liberty Island. Weird. I'll change them tonight. Mrmichaelt 04:40, January 30, 2012 (UTC)

This isn't a big deal as errors go. I make a good many here you and others call out all the time. If errors costed admin rights, I'd be kicked off the Wikia editing community by now period. Don't sweat it. This error is a common error. Wikipedia even is confused on the matter. I did a double take when I saw it that I wasn't wrong. This is a common mistake.  Devilmanozzy (Talk Page)  04:59, January 30, 2012 (UTC)

Time Frame of GB1

I'd like to propose specifying the time frame of when Winston joins the team to October of 1984. In the montage sequence the Omni magazine and Atlantic Monthly are both printed in October 1984 and shown in the montage. The Globe Newspaper has an exact date of October 13, USA Today October 8, and the New York Post is printed October 22. Winston is hired after the montage and presumably no earlier than October 22. The Ghostbusters: The Supernatural Spectacular has the events taking place in late autumn, starting September, and when Dr. Venkman reports to Dana about Zuul, it is late October.

If Winston was hired on or after October 22, Dana and Louis's possession would have occurred either October 25 or November 1, 1984 as they were actual Thursdays . Since Winston states he has only been working for the Company for a few weeks to the Mayor, that would make it either November 1 or 8, placing the Gozer event on November 2 or 9. This also matches with Ghostbusters II stating "Five Years Later", specifically five years from November 1984 to November 1989.I hate jello (talk) 16:45, July 22, 2013 (UTC)

User I hate jello, thank you for your submission. I will review your proposal and post my final thoughts later today. For now, first, the Supernatural Spectacular is not taken as primary canon for this timeline. Second, I thought I had added the dates from the magazines and newspapers but I guess I stopped myself for some reason. I will have to double check that in cause there was a contradiction somehwere. Now that you mention those dates in relation to Ghostbusters II, the October-November time frame does seem more plausible. Mrmichaelt (talk) 01:48, July 23, 2013 (UTC)

Alright, I've reviewed it and it should alright to add in dates in the Movie and IDW timelines only. Mrmichaelt (talk) 06:00, July 23, 2013 (UTC)

Extreme set earlier than TVG?

Quick Note. Shouldn't the events of Ghostbusters the Videogame come before Extreme Ghostbusters? After all, TVG is set in 1991 and Extreme is set at or around 1997. So in the "All" timeline, how does TVG come AFTER Extreme?KFrosty (talk) 19:38, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

I do. I think you're confusing Ghostbusters: The Video Game with Ghostbusters: Sanctum of Slime. Two different games. Sanctum of Slime was set in an ambiguous present day so I set it after Extreme Ghostbusters. Mrmichaelt (talk) 05:15, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

Why the variation in naming dates?

Some timeframes are identified by year or century, but others are identified by distance into the past. Why is this? If they said in 1989 that something happened two thousand years ago, wouldn't that put it at 12 BC? Why say “2000 Years Ago” rather than “12 B.C.”? —Frungi (talk) 23:26, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Without knowing which exact timeline you are looking at, I would guess it was conjecture in the absence of a timeframe or "2000 Years Ago" isn't as solid as an actual date like "12 B.C." because sometimes a character is estimating or rounding up (i.e. when person says this happened 2000 years ago, it might actually be 1997 years ago) like in the Animated Timeline. Mrmichaelt (talk) 23:35, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Proton Pack's power cells

In the courtroom scene in Ghostbusters II, Egon responds to Peter's line "it's been a couple of years since we used this stuff. Hope it still works" by saying that the Proton Pack's "power cells have a half-life of 5,000 years". Considering the packs were made in 1984 and another one was completed in 2021, should there be a title on every timeline that follows GBII and AL called 6,984 A.D and 7,021 A.D that marks the years the Proton Packs will lose function? PolishTheTortuga (talk) 11:44, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Hmm, it's a bit too theoretical. Something could happen to the Proton Packs between then and those dates. But now that you point that out, I should delete Elaine's prediction for the same reason. Mrmichaelt (talk) 21:54, 17 July 2022 (UTC)