Template talk:Period start
Add topic | Template:Period start is indefinitely protected from editing as it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases. |
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Template-protected edit request on 14 January 2023
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I am requesting an edit to this template because, once again, some of the boundaries of the time periods have been changed. This new data comes from the International Commission on Stratigraphy's latest rendition of the geologic timescale: , Changelog:
The changes are:
- Tithonian from 152.1 to 149.2
- Kimmeridgian from 157.3 to 154.8
- Oxfordian from 163.5 to 161.5
- Callovian from 166.1 to 165.3
- Bathonian from 168.3 to 168.2
- Bajocian from 170.3 to 170.9
- Aalenian from 174.1 to 174.7
- Toarcian from 182.7 to 184.2
- Pliensbachian from 190.8 to 192.9
- Sinemurian from 199.3 to 199.5
- Hettangian from 201.3 to 201.4
- Hadean from ~4600 to 4567
The Hadean change is explained in the provided changelog, in case it seems weird. I've already updated the sandbox with these dates, and I will update the uncertainties on Template:Period start error and Geologic time scale. Benniboi01 (talk) 18:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Done Primefac (talk) 08:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Primefac, I made a mistake with the Hadean GSSA. The Hadean age is actually 4567.3, not 4567. Could you fix it? I can submit another request if needed. Benniboi01 (talk) 18:08, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Primefac (talk) 11:24, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Primefac, I made a mistake with the Hadean GSSA. The Hadean age is actually 4567.3, not 4567. Could you fix it? I can submit another request if needed. Benniboi01 (talk) 18:08, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Edit request 29 August 2023
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Description of suggested change: Update to ICC v2023/06
Two minor changes to dates in this update. Langhian from 15.97 to 15.98, and Barremian from ~129.4 to 125.77. Changed in the sandbox and appears to be working correctly in the test cases.
Diff:
| − | barremian | gallic = | + | barremian | gallic = 125.77 |
| − | langhian = 15. | + | langhian = 15.98 |
Template-protected edit request on 30 October 2023
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A new timescale came out a few days ago with the archean GSSA updated. For the line that reads:
| eoarchean | isuan = 4000
replace it with:
| eoarchean | isuan = 4031
Thank you! Benniboi01 (talk) 03:16, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
update to ICC v2024/12
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Description of suggested change: The ICS has recently released the December 2024 revision of the International Chronostratigraphic Chart. I've edited this template's sandbox page in accordance with ICC v2024/12, and I request for the sandbox update to be brought over to the template as a whole. Many of the updates are minor, though a few stages (Wuliuan, Rhaetian, Tithonian, etc.) have received more substantial alterations in their start estimates. I also removed a few outdated tags; for example, the ICC now labels lower/middle/upper Miocene, so tags indicating otherwise are no longer necessary. NGPezz (talk) 02:49, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- NGPezz, can I just verify that the sandbox only contains edits you want to be merged into the main template? (please do not ping on reply) Primefac (talk) 09:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, after double-checking the test cases page I can confirm that the state of the sandbox (as of the current revision) is what I intend for the main template. NGPezz (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Done Primefac (talk) 10:17, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 21 October 2025
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
| − | | hadean = 4567 | + | | hadean = 4567.30 |
| − | | ludfordian = 425 | + | | ludfordian = 425.0 |
| − | | danian | lower paleocene
= 66. | + | | danian | lower paleocene
= 66.00 |
Hey, do you think one of you guys can make the following changes above? Now, for those familiar with the ICS's most recent chart (v2024/12), you may have noticed that the value for the Hadean Eon is not what is displayed in the report. However, this boundary is nonetheless represented on the ICS's GSSP page, supplemented with further sources on the case. Additionally, if you havent noticed, there's a hanging zero at the end of these new values. I prefer if they were kept there, since it is a sign of precision, along with the fact that other ICS boundaries use hanging zeroes as well. — Alex26337 (talk) 08:28, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
Template-protected edit request on 8 June 2026
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Regarding the line: "burgess shale|middle middle cambrian=508"
If the template allows the use of c. as an abbreviation for circa, then please change: 508 to c. 505
If the template does not allow non-numerical values, then please change: 508 to 505
Reason: In the current line of template code, 508 means that the Burgess Shale is 508 million years old. The Burgess Shale, being composed of shale, does not lend itself well to precise radiometric dating and therefore only approximate dates seem to be available, obtained indirectly by comparison with other rock layers (relative dating). The stratigraphic level of the Burgess Shale is a bit higher than the base of the Wuliuan Stage of rock layers. In stratigraphy, rock layer sequences are unchangeable, ages are changeable. The base of the Wuliuan Stage was dated a few decades ago at 509 million years but its age was changed to 506.5 million years by the International Commission on Stratigraphy in December 2024. The Burgess Shale cannot move from its position within the Wuliuan rock layer sequence and its age must be younger than the start of the Wuliuan time interval. An age of 508 million years is now nonsensical/invalid because 508 million years is older than the updated start of the Wuliuan time interval. The change to the age of the base of the Wuliuan rocks dictates that the age of the Burgess Shale must also be changed, that is, from 508 million years to circa 505 million years, so that the Burgess Shale age continues to be geologically shortly after start of the Wuliuan time interval. More precisely, the necessary age adjustment is to change "508" to "c. 505", if the inclusion of "c." representing circa is allowed in this template, otherwise a change to 505 is acceptable. More background about what prompted this request can be found at Talk:Burgess Shale#'508 million years old' claim from introduction. GeoWriter (talk) 15:08, 8 June 2026 (UTC)
- Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 22:46, 8 June 2026 (UTC)