"Weeding" the Timeline & Early Timeline Contribution Guidelines?

[QwertyYerty]

A good starting point is to see how many of the entries in question have articles in the EG that they should be linked to. Steve has started this, but there are probably more.

For the remainder, we should discuss whether an article should be generated or if the timeline entry should instead be removed.

For example, I don't think we have an article on autonomous cars. But they are widely seen as coming in some form fairly soon. Which may or may not be an argument for either removing them from the timeline or generating an article about them or autonomous vehicles in general.

Finally, we might also consider if some entries and articles might work better if consolidated into some larger topical article that might or might not justify a timeline entry.

My 2c worth,

Todd

I have a suggestion on where we should start the discussion. Two entries on the early timeline to start a discussion on and/ or delete are:

52 (2022 ce.)- Continued environmental degradation in some third-world countries.

Because environmental degradation will still be occuring all over the planet (for example the Netherlands and Florida will still be at risk for mass flooding) and it doesn't connect to any articles. Additionally, this sentence implies that environmental degradation has stopped in the majority if countries, which seems unlikely to happen in only 6 years.

And

55 (2025 c.e.) - Laser Weapons first used in warfare.

It connects to a article, but that article doesn't explain the history of laser weapons and doesn't mention anything about this one.

What is supposed to be meant by this entry? Because the lay reader will think portable laser guns will exist in less than 10 years, which is hard to belive. Is this meant as antimissle defense? This should be clarified or deleted. I would delete it because this current entry on the timeline doesn't add detail to the history of laser weapons and can easily become outdated in less than 10 years.