I would appreciate some thoughts on this question. Since the release of the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles on DVD the timeline has been altered to fit the new format. What should then be considered canon? The new timeline or the original timeline? Wgsil 05:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- That's probably something ask over in the Indycron thread at StarWars.com. ;) The problem here is that yes in theory the new edits (being from Lucas) should supercede the previous ones but things like the Lost Journal and Guide use the old dates. Those two reference books give different months for the movies aswell. Vetinari (Appointment) 18:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- Not to mention the interactive timeline, which goes by some of the original episode dates. Adamwankenobi 21:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- I think that the new order of events on the DVDs was just done for convenience sake and not with any intention of deliberately changing the timelines so the old timeline should still be considered canon. Wgsil 03:34, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- Not to mention the interactive timeline, which goes by some of the original episode dates. Adamwankenobi 21:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- To add to the confusion, many of the DVD edits actually contain new footage that ties the two episodes together in a manner inconsistent with the old timeline. For example, Espionage Escapades shows Indy traveling directly from Barcelona to Prague, while the old timeline had him in Petrograd between these two adventures. It's definitely a problem. Regardless, we should try to be as consistent as possible; the Adventure timeline may be a good reference in that regard. Icybro 13:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- the bridging segments do pose a problem in many cases - like when Indy meets Ernie Hemingway, gets injured, bridge: sent to Venice, then sent to Morocco with Edith Wharton, when in fact, the Wharton episode takes place several months before he meets Hemingway. LFL basically hasn't determined their canon timeline - the individual episode dates have not been thrown out, but there's no clear way to reconcile them with the bridging bits. maybe for now, we have to accept two timelines - ugh! i prefer the old dates as they are more historically accurate (under the new dates, Hemingway would not have even been in Europe when he was historically injured) Jawajames 15:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)