FANDOM


Cohdopia?Edit

I feel it is significant to put Cohdopia's splitting into the timeline. Since Coachen is still referred to as a "Cohdopian" during Turnabout Reminiscence, it can safely be assumed that the country still was one at that time. However, should I put it under the 2011-2015 mark, or one of the later ones? Tutuboy95 21:43, March 16, 2010 (UTC)

Gyakuten Guidebook birth dates?Edit

Supposedly, birth years are given in the Gyakuten Guidebooks. However, recent edits have been prone to deductive speculation and some inconsistency in presentation, so some asking around will be done before a list of sources is made. capefeather 15:50, September 4, 2011 (UTC)

Why would AAI and GK2 have the same inonsistencies as JFA and T&T? Both are only in the year 2019. Actually I find this whole inconsistency thing is rather confusing. Maybe that's why the Guidebook ages seem inconsitent because they're made by the same people who messed up to begin with? Sooo... if I understand it correctly, the inconsistency is because the first three games go over more years (like 20016-2017 for AA, 2017-2018 for JFA, 2018-2019 for T&T)? So in the Investigations games, this would only apply to Gumshoe, Franziska and Edgeworth (because their ages are the same as in T&T), wouldn't it? 178.41.218.103 19:11, September 4, 2011 (UTC)
In case you're wondering why the few Inherited Turnabout characters had to be born at a certain date: in example Tsukasa was 16 by December 24 2000, yet she was also still 34 on April 2 2019. So her birthday must be somewhere between April 2 and December 24 1984 (otherwise, if she were born in 1983 after December 24, she'd be 16 in the past, but already 35 in the present; alternatively if she were born before April 2 1985, she'd be 34 in the present but only 15 in the past). Same goes for every other character with two profiles (except obviously Gregory who has no profile and the victim who had no age listed in the present portion). 178.41.218.103 20:27, September 4, 2011 (UTC)

Wait, the guidebooks list ages? I'm not sure how helpful that is since the organizer profiles already have the ages. Do they agree with each other? Also, are you sure GK2 case 3 happened a year before DL-6? (AAI is treated the same as T&T because, well, the profiles effectively treat them the same. If the profile makers still think they're in T&T time, then it's less presumptuous to do the same in the wiki timeline.) capefeather 01:15, September 5, 2011 (UTC)

Well, that's because the problem with the case is that it starts in April 2019 and when Shigaraki starts talking about what happened in the past, it just says "18 years ago". And when you then start playing as Gregory, all you see is the date, December 24. The person who created the Inherited Turnabout page on the wikia automatically assumed it was December 24 2001 and ever since then the mistake circulated over the internet. You are never actually told what year it is, but it can easily be deduced and it is actually a vital part of the case due to the statute of limitations. It is always 15 years but when a witness flees the country, the years don't add up. The witness in question (I won't name to avoid spoiling much) was in Zheng Fa from 2001 to 2004. The present portion is in April 2019, so even with the time frozen for that duration, it's 15 years and 4 months. But this was way before the 3-day trial rule was introduced, so the trial took a whole year (so Tenkai's arrest was in 24 December 2000, but he wasn't convicted until 28 December 2001, in the trial which lead to DL-6), thereby making the total 14 years and 4 months (so less than the statute of limitations) and this allowed Edgeworth to do what need be done with the witness. It is actually a focal point in the case, where you first convince the witness he has nothing to lose by testifying since it's way past the statute of limitations, then you point out some things witness doesn't like so he gets defensive and hides behind the statute yet you prove that it was a moot point from the beginning.

A simpler, less spoilerish way - when Shigaraki was helping Gregory in the case, he wasn't a lawyer yet. It is stated he got his badge the next year. He inherited Gregory's law firm after Gregory died. Which he couldn't take over if he weren't a lawyer (like Phoenix in 1-2). And since we know Gregory died in 2001, this happened in the year before - therefore 2000.

Something similar happened when people wrote the articles about the characters who were in the previews with Souta Sarushiro. For some reason, the person who edited it at that time (before the game came out) thought that Sarushiro was Onyanpokon. It referenced the Nintendo Dream article which previewed some of the Imprisoned Turnabout characters, but in actuality, the only Onyankopon reference with Sarushiro was the mask on his shirt. That's about it. He was always just a monkey trainer, even before he joined Tachimi circus I think. Yet this little misinformation managed to infect the whole internet (at least the English portion). If you'd actually put Souta's Japanese name and the Japanese name of Onyankopon into Google, one of the first result is a Japanese imageboard where someone is asking why foreigners think Sarushiro is Onyanpokon and they quote the Ace Attorney wikia... (just saying, by the way) 78.98.11.50 09:35, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
Come to think of it, the same thing works for the new AAI characters who were in Turnabout Reminiscence (Faraday, Badd, Coachen and Yew) and had a profile later on. If Badd was 53 by September 2011, yet also only 60 by March 2019 (which is 8 years later), his birthday logically had to be between March and September (same goes for the other 3). I understand that writing March to September is pointless, but it pinpoints their birthdates to a specific year at least. I just copypasted it before from the website (sure, it does have some mistakes, with Devorae in example), but it actually makes sense. Same goes for Ema Skye, she must have been born in October to December 2000. The only real contradictions in the game are the ones described in the policy page with Edgeworth and Wright (and of course, the minor characters who only appear once in JfA and T&T since you have no other date to compare it to). 78.98.11.50 10:07, September 5, 2011 (UTC)

You've basically confirmed my worst fear of having this wiki run without a Japanese-literate to look after the Japan-only articles :( I suspected something fishy about the users editing the GK2 articles by the way they were editing other articles, but without someone who's played the game, there wasn't much that I could do.

It's true that there are only two actual birthday contradictions, but they stem from the wider problem of the relevant people having zero regard for absolute dates and birthdays when giving ages. There's also the issue of AJ having to take place in 2026, which is not a "contradiction" in itself but causes a very awkward situation and makes Phoenix in particular defy all logic in attempts to identify a birthday. Specific birthday ranges could easily be falsified whenever a new game comes out. That is why I find it much safer (especially with a lack of people who care a whole lot about this) to emulate the profile makers' behaviour (as it were) and use the year ranges, because IMO being imprecise is better than being wrong. An alternative could be to include a field for deduced date ranges in the character infobox, but I'm wary about having to maintain these with each game release.

The reason I used two-year ranges for AAI case 4 was due to their use of ages from T&T case 4. Edgeworth is stated as being 20 years old when he very likely should have been 19 at that time. It's possible that they increment the age at some consistent point every year rather than at every birthday, since that's how ages increment in Korea and I'm fairly certain it's how Japan at least used to increment ages as well. I get the point on Ema, though, since the deduced date range would be October 2000 - February 2001, making the possible birth year range 2000-2001, similarly to the other 1-5 people.

capefeather 16:28, September 5, 2011 (UTC)

Just to be clear on Tateyuki....
According to his page it said he became a defense attorney at the year 2009. And the IS-7 did happen at the year 2000 not 2001... The reason for making this Gregory's last case is because of the fact that Gregory appealed over and over throughout the year... until you know...
AmeftoWriter 02:26, September 6, 2011 (UTC)
Dunno about that. Seems like just a mistake/oversight to me. It says he "passed the bar" and I suppose you're already a lawyer after that. There's no other way he'd get his Law Offices anyway. Also, whether he became a lawyer before or after his birthday in 2001 is unclear. 178.40.64.134 06:29, September 6, 2011 (UTC)

IS-5 and SS-7 Edit

Is there anyone else who noticed that the creators made a huge logical fallacy with the numbers? I mean, everything would line up so perfectly. Each background case would have two unique letters and a number representing the chronological order when it happened. But no, they had to switch the numbers. 95.103.220.81 21:54, September 10, 2011 (UTC)

Dual Destinies time frame Edit

Considering Turnabout Countdown takes place in December, I'm not so sure about pegging the year of that case as 2027 right now. I know that the game is supposed to take place "one year after" Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney, but even that is kind of vague considering the weirdness that's happened before. (Also, one year relative to what?) What do people think? capefeather (talk) 23:28, May 15, 2013 (UTC)

I've changed the date to December 18 (2027?) on the Turnabout Countdown page. I think that'll do for now until we get more info. Maybe something similar would work for the timeline itself? - Strabo412 (talk) 16:05, May 16, 2013 (UTC)
Dual Destinies is supposedly set in 2027, a year after Apollo Justice's timeline. I checked the UR-1 Incident page and the year is 2019, that's 8 years ago but it's supposed to be 7 years ago. Should I just leave the year as it is for now till we get confirmation (By playing the English version.)? Because it is confusing whenever I open the page. Tiddlypops (talk) 17:55, August 27, 2013 (UTC)

Where's Waldo Armando? Edit

Godot is not mentioned at all in the timeline. Neither is Diego Armando mentioned coming out of his coma, which happens some time in 2017. 108.212.129.166 11:18, January 8, 2014 (UTC)

Trial Dates Edit

I noticed that many of the dates for trials also include the first day of investigation, even though the trial itself didn't technically start until the next day. For example, the dates for Reunion, and Turnabout say that the trial went from June 20-22, but the first day of court was June 21. Not all of the cases follow this; the date for Maya's trial in Turnabout Sisters only includes its one day in court, September 7, and not the first day of investigation, September 6. Should the first day of investigation be included in the dates for trials, or not? 216.49.181.254 21:06, February 18, 2014 (UTC)

Proposal: Split the timeline in two Edit

I've been thinking about this for a few months now, but I wanted to concentrate on the episode articles of DD and GK2, and wait until the editing craze of PLvPW had calmed down. Basically, I believe that the "school year" system that's been used up to now is getting increasingly inadequate with the increasingly glaring discrepancies between the timeline and the ages stated in character profiles. Maybe a future game will even cross over into the next year again, and then things would get really awkward. Combined with the issues with the age field in Template:Character that have been brought up, it makes for a rather confusing state of affairs.

It may make sense to have two timelines and have each event (births in particular) be shown in one or the other (or both) depending on whether they happen before or after a year turnover. For example, the births of Redd White, Max Galactica and Luke Atmey would be in the first timeline; the births of Matt Engarde, Viola Cadaverini and Apollo Justice would be in the second timeline; and the births of Will Powers and Maggey Byrde would be in both timelines. The main concern I see is that we'd potentially split events from the same game and that might get awkward. Maybe it's not even necessary to split the timeline. Nonetheless, I'd like to see what people think and maybe this could later transition into other discussions like what to do with the ages in character pages.

capefeather (talk) 23:51, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm a simple soul and I don't 100% follow what you mean. Could you give examples in terms of what it would look like on the page? - Strabo412 (talk) 17:29, April 17, 2014 (UTC)

The original idea I had was to split the timeline into two different articles. Some events can be compared directly to the DL-6 Incident without any problems. Others cross over into a different year and can't be compared directly to the DL-6 Incident without messing up birth dates / ages. I hope you see what I mean if you consider the births of the characters I mentioned above. capefeather (talk) 01:05, May 9, 2014 (UTC)

I think I understand? What were you thinking exactly in terms of splitting the article into two (article names and so on)? - Strabo412 (talk) 16:12, May 9, 2014 (UTC)

I was considering having one timeline that only contains events from the original trilogy, and another timeline that contains events from every game except the first. I was considering this because I wasn't sure if the games really cared about anchoring to a specific event (namely the DL-6 Incident) anymore. However, it occurred to me today that The Inherited Turnabout shows that the writers are still at least paying attention to the relative timing of events other than dates of birth. It also occurred to me that every canon game "spills over", including the first game as of the inclusion of Rise from the Ashes.

Now I'm thinking of something less violent and less complicated than splitting the timeline. Namely, base every character's stated year of birth on the post-2004 games. Phoenix Wright is born in 1993, Ema Skye is born in 2001, Pearl Fey is born in 2010, Shi-Long Lang is born in 1992, etc. in line with the Apollo Justice / Dual Destinies character profiles. Even the characters in the original first game should probably get the same treatment, in line with the stance that Rise from the Ashes is just as much a part of the first game as the other cases, even though it didn't exist in the original version. We could even make an "old" timeline solely concerning the events and characters of the original GBA trilogy, from the perspective of the original GBA trilogy (so Phoenix Wright is born in 1992).

This seems like a very clean solution to me. It would dispel the confusion in the timeline we've experienced thus far by treating the trilogy as spilling over into a previous year, rather than spilling over into a subsequent year. Let's just hope that if another game pulls the year-crossover shenanigans, it doesn't complicate matters even further.

capefeather (talk) 03:15, May 10, 2014 (UTC)

That sounds pretty reasonable to me. - Strabo412 (talk) 09:44, May 10, 2014 (UTC)

Apollo Justice in 2025? Edit

Discussion moved (and continued) here.

The Flashback Cases Edit

I think I made a drastic error concerning the flashback cases and their "dates." I am not a 100% sure which year they all take place in. I know a lot of people will groan when they read this but to make up for some reopenings of old wounds I think I found the origin of the problems determining the years of Turnabout Memories, Turnabout Beginnings, and Turnabout Reminisence (The Inherited Turnabout took place in 2000, there is no doubt about that). I think people were confused on when Turnabout Memories took place because it at the beginning of the case we read

-- 5 Years Earlier--

Mia Fey

2nd Trial

The question being which case was it 5 years prior to. Some would say it has to be "The Stolen Turnabout" the start of Phoenix's narritve. Some could argue Farewell, My Turnbabout. And still some say it has to be Bridge to the Turnabout. But it is never really explained which case it is 5 years prior to.

Now I will admit that I thought it was 5 years and some months before the Stolen Turnabout. But looking over the facts again I think having it be 5 years prior to Bridge to the Turnabout would cause less problems then The Stolen Turnabout and Farewell, My Turnabout.

Let's look at the facts.

First off, another reason people thought Turnabout Memories ect. took place in the years they did was the ages.

For example: Dahlia is age 20 in Turnabout Memories and her twin Iris is 25 in Bridge to the Turnabout. Now according to this wiki their birthday is somewhere in 1993. Here comes why people would think Turnabout Memories takes pace in 2013 and not 2014. 2013-1993=20. Holds up huh?

Now before you say obvious fail or think oh Bridge to the Turnabout must take place in 2018. Let me explain how TM could take place in 2014 without changing Dahlia's and Iris's age. The explanation is that their birthday takes place after April. Solves the problem doesn't it?

Alright so maybe Iris and Dahlia was a fluke. So let's look at Kay had TR take place in 2012 not 2011. (Presumed birthyear 2001)

If it takes place in 2011: 2011-2001=10. 2012: 2012-2001=11?

Again this can easily be explained if her birthday takes place past September 10th. Remember that she is 17 in 2019, clearly she didn't have her birthday yet.

So we're two for two here. Let's keep going with Franziska (1999)

2011-1999=12? OK obvious flaw clearly resolved in having TR take place in 2012.

Also this would resolve some contradictions we had such as Edgeworth being 20 in February 2012 and yet 25 in March 2018. Out TB in 2013 and the problem is solved.

But I digress. This theory is not perfect. Yes it solves many problems but causes one big one. That being Gumshoe. If TR takes place on September 10th 2012 and Gumshoe is 25 yet almost exactly 4 years later on September 9th 2016, he is recorded to be 30. Clearly it's a flaw.

Wait but he's 26 in TB, is this a wiki error or a game error? (Could someone double check, I misplaced my copy of Investigations). My head hurts.

Wrapping up, it is clear how this problem came to be and no one should be blamed for it considering we pretty much had to play Where's Waldo on the date of these three cases. The theory holds water for the most part, so I would like to hear some responses either approving or disproving the theory I have presented. Franzyfan1998 (talk) 16:18, July 25, 2014 (UTC)

I already presented the solution I believe to work more regularly, I think. I'm pretty sure I presented it here. - Sligneris (talk) 19:24, July 25, 2014 (UTC)
OK we discussed that already, and since I do not want to repeat past arguements, I would like proof from the canon information and not that again. Can you provide a flaw in the arguement, other than year grouping? I apologize if that offends you but I don't want to repeat previous arguements.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 19:51, July 25, 2014 (UTC)
Well, yeah. There are two tabs, the latter of which displays relativity between the information regarding months and ages at the specific points in time. You can just click. Everything marked red is a contradicting information withing the system used.
I mean, didn't I just link to the explanation? I'm a bit tired of repeating myself... - Sligneris (talk) 20:06, July 25, 2014 (UTC)
Could you please not self advertise your wiki, we can see it. And that is not the point. I want to see if there are flaws in my theory that does not involve year grouping. Can you please repsect my wishes? Because I think i found a way to fix a lot of problems with the timeline and two blatent contradictions within it. Not all but a lot.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 20:13, July 25, 2014 (UTC)
Did I ever link to that wiki outside of relevant suggestions...? It's not even a wiki, it's more like my sandbox. xD Also, *sigh*, you do realize that the table without year grouping is right in another tab? You know, the "Following year" system, out of no better ways to call it, with AJ in 2026? What I presented there is exactly the timeline without the year grouping...
Still, moving on, the problem in your theory about moving T&T's flashback cases lies in Edgeworth's case and backstory. He is said to have 4-year winning streak in 2016, and you want to place his first case in 2013? Even despite the fact that he's 20 in T. Beginnings, Feb. 16, 2013 and 25 in Mar. 23, 2018, since you insist on taking months into account? What do you suggest? That he aged 5 years with full 6 years passing?
The moment we count months without having exact indication that these are relevant is the moment when we get back where we started, really. xD - Sligneris (talk) 21:05, July 25, 2014 (UTC)
First off thank you for providing a contradiction in this theory, that being He is said to have 4-year winning streak in 2016. Rest assured I will take that into consideration.
Secondly the whole fact that he's 20 in T. Beginnings, Feb. 16, 2012 and 25 in Mar. 23, 2018  buisness I have clearly explained the solution. If T. Beginnings is to be recorded at 2013 the problem will go away. 2018-2013=5. Seems to hold water doesn't it?Franzyfan1998 (talk) 21:25, July 25, 2014 (UTC)
Ah, right. Nevermind, I don't know why I contradicted your suggestion, without actually adjusting the date to your suggestion. Sorry, I'm a little bit tired now, so I kind of derped out. Once I get some rest, I'll get back to that. - Sligneris (talk) 21:45, July 25, 2014 (UTC)
I get this theory, I really do but do you honestly expect us to believe that everyone mentioned above just magically happened to have their birthday after each of these cases dates?71.191.9.160 16:32, July 31, 2014 (UTC)
Well I know it can be hard to wrap your head around it, and I'll admit it is streching it just a bit but there is a sufficient amount of proof that some characters have their birthdays at the end of the year.
For starters, Shih-na is 29 in 2019 with a birthyear of 1989 so her birthday is past March. Same with Kay and Badd with their birthyears. And Iris (though there is the smallest possibility of her birthday being between Februrary 10th and February 16th but that's a little slim.
And the most convincing evidence is Godot! In Turnabout Beginnings he is being listed as 27 but by the time we was 28. With a birthyear of 1985 there is no way he can turn 28 in 2012. 2013 yes! 2012 no!
Hopefully this will help dispell your doubts.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 02:00, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Have you seen Forum:Some stuff that really needs a conclusion yet? capefeather (talk) 03:11, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah but I don't think we should change birthyears. For example Godot is turning 34 in 2019 and with a birthyear of 1985 it makes total sense.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 19:06, August 2, 2014 (UTC)

Professor Layton vs Phoenix Wright: Ace AttorneyEdit

Shouldn't the events occurring in Professor Layton vs Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney be included in the timeline? While there's no specific dates mentioned, the main game events must occur between Luke Atmey's trial (because Maya says "Zvarri" several times in the game) and Shadi Enigmar's trial. In addition, if we consider the Special Episodes to be canon despite them breaking the 4th wall, the main game events must have occurred very soon after Luke Atmey's trial, because the Special Episodes occur one year later and Phoenix is still an attorney. Not to mention that Edgeworth is in England in the Special Episodes as well, which may be the same overseas trip referred in the first Investigations game. This would place the main game events between October and December 2018 and the Special Episodes between February and March 2019. Granted, this is far from a full year (5 months in the best case), but it would match the yearly logic that was used to construct the timeline in the first place. 199.180.96.96 07:01, September 3, 2014 (UTC)

Actually, Maya says: "Hey! Check out all those statues! These sorta remind me of the statue of Ami Fey in the Hazakura Temple" if you examine the statues in the small room in the ruins. That means that the game would have to fit somewhere in the period between Bridge to the Turnabout (February 10, 2019) and Zak Gramarye's trial (April 19), but also taking into account Maya and Wright's cameo appearances in the Edgeworth games (i.e., March 13 and April 6). This means that the special episodes would have to occur in 2020, by which time Nick has been disbarred already. I think how we handle PL vs PW stuff on this wiki in general needs a discussion to be honest. - Strabo412 (talk) 10:27, September 3, 2014 (UTC)
Well I think the strongest conclusion is that PL vs PW  took place between the Stolen Turnabout and Recipe for Turnabout. And about the Ami Fey statue if you recall Maya and Phoenix have seen it before at Lordly Tailor in the Stolen Turnabout. So I guess Adrian told them the place if you want to stretch it. But even with that Phoenix should be disbared by the time of the special episodes so i'm pretty stumped too.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 21:03, September 3, 2014 (UTC)
Is it the same statue? Surely there's more than one statue of the founder of the Feys kicking about. Unless T&T states otherwise, it seems safe to assume they're different statues. If Nick and Maya can go on boat rides and look at tall buildings between Bridge and Succession, then they have enough free time to defend witches in court. - Strabo412 (talk) 00:54, September 4, 2014 (UTC)
Sorry that I'm butting in, but it's also possible the events took place after Turnabout Reclaimed. We don't know Wright's or Maya's age in the game, so it's still possible. I have 3 theories:

1: It did indeed take place after the Mask * de Masque trials, but before the Tres Bien trial. 2:It took place after Wright got his badge back. 3:The events are non-canon, or part of a different timeline altogether. 75.108.29.6 01:16, September 4, 2014 (UTC)

Why do people seem to be so averse to it happening after Bridge? Anyway, after Reclaimed is impossible since Phoenix wears his old suit and Maya would be 28. Maya does not look older in PL vs PW. The canonicity of PL vs PW is pretty vague as there's not really any definitive proof one way or the other (at least not when you exclude the Special Episodes). Again, how we handle the stuff in the game will need a proper discussion at some point soon. - Strabo412 (talk) 01:32, September 4, 2014 (UTC)
Sound theory Mr. Contributer (or miss), but I doubt that the second option is the likely one. Excusing the fact that Apollo, Trucy, and Athena are not mentioned there are still a few flaws.
  • Miles is not the Chief Prosecutor
  • Phoenix makes no references to his hobness or anything from AJ and DD
  • Maya should look older. (Phoenix should too a little bit)
To Strabo412: Um yes. The statue of Ami Fey at Lordly Tailor is the same as the statue of Ami Fey at Hazakura. Also people probably think that it happened after Bridge because it would be hard to except that a whole game happened during Trials and Tribulations. I mean PW never crossed cases of one game happening during another.
Anyway I think we should just consider the crossover game like we do the manga. It's there but there is no definite time (year) for either. That's probably the simplist solution.
However if it did take place between The Stolen Turnabout and Recipe for Turnabout then we can conclude that it did not happen in December. Remember when Gumshoe yelled at Phoenix for getting Maggey a guilty verdict. After reading the newspaper and finding out the date Phoenix deliberately says
Phoenix Wright
But I wasn't involved in a poisoning case in December!


And Newton Belduke was poisoned (suicide but still). So it would have to be between October (September in Japanese) and November 30th. Franzyfan1998 (talk) 01:45, September 4, 2014 (UTC)

If Hazakura Temple is mentioned, then that pretty much places whenever that happened after Bridge, since they only find out about it through a magazine. (I bought the game today so I don't really know what's going on yet, but I'm just going by what's been mentioned.) capefeather (talk) 02:29, September 4, 2014 (UTC)

Do you have a quote for the two statues being one and the same Franzyfan? They look the same, but are they the same? I had a quick look at a transcript of Bridge and saw no mention of Nick going "oh, it's that statue again". If it's true, that would be a good thing to note elsewhere. Anyway, I think it might be a good idea to eventually note the timeline of PL vs PW somewhere; I'm thinking the bottom of this page, integrated into this page via a collapsible "Ambiguously Canon Content" template (like Zeldawiki.org does), or on a separate page entirely. - Strabo412 (talk) 22:18, September 4, 2014 (UTC)
Several points
Strabo412: Well I have failed to find a quote that conatins both The Kurain Exhibit and Ami's statue, however is there any evidence to suggest that they are not in fact the same statue?
Capefeather: Phoenix found out about it through the magazine however Maya did show some knowledge that it did infact exist.
Maya Fey
You know, I think I've heard of this temple before. It's a famous channeling dojo.
So it could be possible that she was told about Hazakura by Adrian, remembered it but by February forgot the name. It is possible.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 16:10, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

I'd say the whole thing contradicts the main timeline way too much to fit anywhere and even then, it would be too questionable, seeing as we can't really come to a conclusion regarding things like years in which main games take place...

I'd rather not include it at all in the timeline. - Sligneris (talk) 13:47, September 7, 2014 (UTC)

Yeah. Going back to what I said earlier we should just consider the crossover game like we do the manga. It's there but there is no definite time (year) for either. In other words neither will be mentioned in the timeline seeing as how both, (granted the crossover only contradicted the timeline with the special episodes) contradicted the timeline.
It might be fun to debate when the crossover game takes place in terms of years, but if you think about it, that informtion is really just an easter egg or it will be more of a theory than an actaul fact. But that's just my opinion.Franzyfan1998 (talk) 14:32, September 7, 2014 (UTC)

Dai Gyakuten SaibanEdit

Episode 4 of Dai Gyakuten Saiban lists Sōseki Natsume's age as 33, which effectively sets the events of the game at 1899-1900 (and I see little reason as to why the developers would change Natsume's birthday of February 9, 1867 when it has no bearing on the actual story). That being said, should the events of Dai Gyakuten Saiban be included in this timeline, or is that game considered to be non-canon similarly to the Professor Layton crossover? DarkShadowFox256 (talk) 02:35, August 3, 2016 (UTC)

I was always under the assumption this game WAS canon, considering it was headed by Takumi, after all, and that they made so many parrellels between Nick and Ryu and the fact that Ryu's his anscestor and all... ~ FenriDarkWolf ~ (talk) 07:11, August 3, 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough.  I guess the parallels between Phoenix and Ryu should've made it abundantly clear that this game was canon, especially considering that this game doesn't cross franchises in the same way as Professor Layton.  I just figured that since no one added any of the events of Dai Gyakuten Saiban to the timeline more than a year after its release (even with a fairly clear reference), that this game would be treated the same way as the Professor Layton crossover on this timeline/wiki.  </span>DarkShadowFox256 (talk) 07:46, August 3, 2016 (UTC)

The dates given in the episodes' pages seem to go by Natsume's age. However, it's inconsistent with how old Sherlock Holmes is supposed to be at that time; he should be in his mid-40s but is 34. Plus, Natsume didn't go to London until 1901. I asked about this a little over a year ago and some DLC seems to give 1897 as the (latter) year in which the game takes place. capefeather (talk) 01:39, August 4, 2016 (UTC)


Phoenix vs Blackquill Edit

"2028: April: Phoenix Wright and Simon Blackquill face off each other in court." What case does this refer to? The DLC case and finale of Dual Destinies are already listed. Is there another case I've some how managed to miss? Oni Dark Link 08:58, October 6, 2016 (UTC)

It's the case in the anime prolouge. ~ FenrirDarkWolf ~ (talk) 10:37, October 6, 2016 (UTC)

Oh. Didn't know they dipped a toe into the canon at such a late point. I'll have to check it out. There should probably be a link to the anime's article (or maybe even an article about the trial itself) to avoid confusion. Oni Dark Link 05:16, October 7, 2016 (UTC)

Owen Gonzales Edit

Who the heck is Owen Gonzales? Johnandsoon (talk) 04:13, October 9, 2016 (UTC)

Owen Gonzalez is apparently a famous baseball player (the fourth hitter in fact of his team). When trying to deflect the blame away from Owen, Uendo brought up this guyFranzyfan1998 (talk) 04:18, October 9, 2016 (UTC)
Ah, well thanks. Was there some mention of how old Gonzalez was? Since he's put on the timeline being born in 91 or 2. Johnandsoon (talk) 04:56, October 9, 2016 (UTC)
Yeah Patches said he was 36Franzyfan1998 (talk) 05:11, October 9, 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! Wow, right down to which personality said it. Johnandsoon (talk) 05:14, October 9, 2016 (UTC)

DGS Edit

Wait its definitive that DGS is at the actual turn of the century.

I know it's pre-January 1901 considering they mention that call England the Queen's Kingdom. But stillFranzyfan1998 (talk) 14:08, October 20, 2016 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the DGS timeline is based off Natsume Sōseki real life date-of-birth. ~ FenrirDarkWolf ~ (talk) 20:00, October 20, 2016 (UTC)

Timeline Reckoning, Once Again Edit

So, years passed and I kind of left this matter behind... and maybe for the better, since I was getting too argumentative back in earlier discussions. Still, the same contradiction is still very much there, so maybe I'll just try to lay out the issue more clearly... And since I have no emotional investment in it anymore, I guess I'll just let you decide what to do with that information.

So, there are multiple ways to look at the timeline. First way is to just look at ages in the profiles and compare them. I believe it's pretty likely that this is how Capcom handles years to start with - just add one whenever there's a sequel. 

While I'm not sure if there were any years given at first, the English version of the game had year 2001 as the date of DL-6. Which I suppose allowed this page to be created to begin with.

Well, next up is applying proper chronology. So basically, assign years to all events in the game. While that makes sense, I have to admit that whenever people bring up specific months or birthdays, I feel it becomes painfully obvious that developers didn't really think that far out...

Normally, it's understandable to strictly follow the months in which the cases take place, and take note of when the year passes. That being said, when we do that and then accept that seven years passed between the Gramarye trial and Shadi Enigmar's murder... it creates a contradiction

Profiles Profiles w/ DL-6 Chronology
GS1 20XX 2016 2016→2017
GS2 20XX+1 2017 2017→2018
GS3 20XX+2 2018 2018→2019
GS4 20XX+2+7 2025 2026
GS5 20XX+2+7+1 2026 2027
GS6 20XX+2+7+2 2027 2028

There's a gap of an exactly one year. All trilogy characters that reappear after the time skip are listed as year younger than they should've been.

There are multiple solutions to this I suppose. One would be the current one - stick to chronologyy and as far as birth years go, list years on the double, just to be safe - and just don't think about the character ages too much.

Another solution would be taking the ages listed in the profiles as priority - which would allow for continued consistency of character ages as the series goes on. This creates another problem, though - "seven years" from Apollo Justice suddenly become "six years" instead.

So, I've been wondering what are your opinions on this. - Sligneris (talk) 23:30, October 21, 2016 (UTC)

AA6 takes place in 2028, that I'm sure of. Would you please take a look at this picture?
If you were to compare the date and day to a 2028 calendar, it is a complete match. That's all I really wanted to say. The ages sure are confusing!
116.14.127.47 01:52, October 22, 2016 (UTC)116.14.127.47
Well, that's definitely compelling - and if it's the same in Japenese version, it's even definitive.
What does it mean for trilogy characters, though? Stuff like Phoenix being 24 in 2016, but only 33 in 2026 does feel hard to ignore sometimes. - Sligneris (talk) 07:27, October 22, 2016 (UTC)
I'm completely stumped on that. Phoenix's age in Turnabout for Tomorrow (34) which takes place in December 2027 and his age in Turnabout Sisters (24) which takes place in Septemer 2016 contradict each other even if we were to take birthdays into account. They really should fix this problem.
116.14.127.47 11:07, October 22, 2016 (UTC) 116.14.127.47
The problem with Phoenix's age was most likely the result of an oversight, especially since it's easy to see why it happened -- they made him 33 in AJ by adding 7 to his T&T age, since the game was (as dialogue would have us believe) supposed to take place 7 years after T&T, but they forgot they had to add an additional year because the beginning of AJ takes place 7 years after the end of T&T. So, just like Phoenix aged one year between PW:AA and JFA, and between JFA and T&T, he should have aged another between T&T and the Gramarye case, then another 7 between that case and Turnabout Trump. The result was an error which then carried over to the other returning trilogy characters (Maya, Pearl, Edgeworth and Larry) because they had their new ages calculated from Phoenix's. The exception is Ema, because her only trilogy appearance was in the latter year of PW:AA, which is the year of JFA (2017). She mentions in Rise from the Ashes that she'll be "16 years old this year", which makes her birth year 2001, which is consistent with her age in the post-timeskip games and even proves that AJ has to take place in 2026 if we try to deduce birthdays from profiles ages -- or at least, it proves that we're faced with an impossible scenario no matter which method we go with.
There's no perfect solution, which is why I like Capefeather's method of associating profile ages with the general year range of the whole game rather than exact dates -- i.e., Phoenix being 24 in PW:AA only means he has that age in the year range of 2016-2017, which makes his birth year 1992-1993, which fits with him being 33 at some point in 2026. Bluebully (talk) 11:38, October 22, 2016 (UTC)

Trucy in Gramarye-Land datesEdit

This is just a point I noticed when it comes to The Magical Turnabout. The Trucy in Gramarye-Land poster stays that the show runs from "April 29th (Sat.) - May 1 (Mon.). These days dates & days of the week indeed match up to 2029. I wondered if this was worth mentioning anywhere, since outside of the date of DL-6 this is the only major evidence for the year of the game. 151.225.95.34 13:28, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

Anime TimelineEdit

So, because now the anime has its own canon with original storylines and changed dates, can we make a separate page listing the timeline for this too? What do you guys think? PokeFanClaire (talk) 08:17, September 6, 2019 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what to do with the anime "canon" in general, honestly. I don't think it generally is considered "canon" but it doesn't seem to disrupt anything outside the trilogy to my knowledge (even Adrian hasn't appeared outside the trilogy). Then again, I'm not very picky about that kind of detail usually. The anime-only events could even just be added to this timeline, I guess. I know some events have different dates in the anime, but it's still such a minor thing to me that both dates could probably just be added with labels for which version each date comes from. Again, I could very much be missing something big that I haven't considered, but that's just my personal view on this. capefeather (talk) 00:41, September 7, 2019 (UTC)


While I do agree that we could list some things in this timeline page (such as, the events of the original episodes), I'd say we should still have a different page for anime events too. For example:

  • The First Turnabout starting at the end of March instead of early August, so Phoenix starts his career earlier than canon.
  • Rise from the Ashes is still not part of the anime events. 
  • Anime Franziska is most likely older than game Franziska, as evidenced on-screen.
  • The Lost Turnabout not only happening after Reunion and Turnabout, but after Turnabout Big Top and Farewell, My Turnabout, as well. Also Dustin Prince's name changed to "Constable Prince".
  • Recipe for Turnabout happening in early November 2018 instead of January 2019.

While some changes are indeed minor, placing the anime dates next to the game dates would be confusing imo. I could make a user page testing this. PokeFanClaire (talk) 08:55, September 7, 2019 (UTC)

All I'm saying is that the details that are changed in the anime don't seem to be so big that they contradict what happens in other games. I don't know what you mean by some of these because I don't think a date is given for Lost at all. Dustin Prince's name is the same. RtfA being excluded from the anime events is kind of irrelevant. I get the argument that perhaps putting labels like (anime) / (games) may be confusing compared to having a separate timeline. I'm not sure I agree, but I don't really mind either way. capefeather (talk) 22:56, September 7, 2019 (UTC)

Shooting of Wocky KitakiEdit

I don't see a source for the date of Wocky's shooting. I only see that Alita quit the Meraktis Clinic in January. It's also established that it happened "six months ago", making it December when he was shot. capefeather (talk) 22:11, December 26, 2019 (UTC)

Addressing DGS and vsEdit

I'll cut to the chase here. I think DGS should get its own timeline page, and I don't think vs should have a timeline at all.

The problem with DGS is that there's no actual good date to base absolute dates on. The timeline of the games in Gyakuten Taizen 2001-2016 merely lists the duology as taking place in the 19th century, not even the 20th. Though it's evidently supposed to be close to 1900, the current reckoning puts a majority of the DGS timeline after 1900, which is a problem. There could still be a timeline using relative dates, and I guess it doesn't have to go into a separate timeline page, but I do think it would still look kind of weird. Plus the duology is related to the rest of the series in name only.

As for vs, well, there's a lot of evidence that it's not supposed to be canon to AA at all (though arguably it could easily be canon to Layton). The aforementioned Taizen timeline doesn't mention the game at all. I also recall some interview or another establishing that it's not supposed to be canon to AA, but unfortunately I don't remember the details at this point. I'm sure another regular at the wiki does. I don't think not being canon should be disqualifying by itself (there's manga stuff in the timeline right now and personally I'm fine with it whether or not it's "canon"), but it's on top of the fact that the game gives no absolute dates, ages, or hard relations to events in other games (only fan-service references, like in PXZ2 or UMvC3). So the timeline for that game ends up being unremarkable.

capefeather (talk) 03:50, January 17, 2020 (UTC)

I agree with both of these points. Even if VS is supposed to be canon (which I don't think it is), the dates here are pure speculation, which doesn't really belong on the wiki. The manga stuff might be better on a separate timeline page, IMO. As for DGS, I'm fine with whatever solution you think is best. Bluebully (talk) 17:52, January 17, 2020 (UTC)
VS is not really canon to PL, either. The PL series only has very vague hints at the time it takes place, but it's most likely to play in the 20th century (70's maybe (German wiki has years)) and this would obviously absolutely contradict the AA timeline. I think VS was really only about combining the two series for an interesting and fun game. That's probably a reason why they ignored timeline differences and left out time references. We addressed this issue in our wiki by using years that fit into the rest of the timeline but having references tags to show a year's placement in the AA timeline. –PHTL ⟨…⟩ 22:51, January 17, 2020 (UTC)

Semi-overhaul planEdit

So this is where I'm going to describe the broad strokes of all the changes that I have planned for editing this page. The plan hasn't been fully fleshed out and I have a variety of vague ideas to solidify things more, so any feedback would be appreciated.

I've created what will hopefully be close to the final product for this plan on a template page, Template:Timeline. The main reason I have for creating a separate template is that I have some ideas for using the data for multiple different purposes outside of just this page. I have created a Lua module, Module:Table, which contains a way to return a portion of the table. So for example, on the Timeline page, we could still have the timeline divided into sections like we have now, with the table divided up into chunks to be displayed in each section. I've been planning on making other functions to further the functionality of the table. Maybe birth year fields on Template:Character could be done mostly automatically with a search function. Related to this is the use of a table with event categories. A lot of that is to make the data easier to parse, hopefully easier to read, maybe even easier to CSS style.

The rest of this is going to be changes to the actual timeline information, and this is where I think more needs to be fleshed out.

  • Standardized all of the character birth years and even some of the event years to a two-year system as described in Ace Attorney Wiki:Timeline. Several characters actually don't play with this system all too well, and this is noted in each case.
    • Converted the DGS years to a relative system, with the events of most of the duology residing at "Year 0". The birth years here are simply -[age] (for characters whose ages increment, the latter age is used).
  • Removed all references to Professor Layton vs. Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney and manga. The crossover has no clear relation to anything in the rest of the series, and is largely built like a single case, so there doesn't seem to be a point in including a timeline for it at all, since (at least in my view) the whole point of a series timeline is to sort out time relationships between events across games. I also looked into the manga timelines a little bit, and it doesn't seem like it's all that clear when those stories happen relative to the games, either. It might still be worth it to create a separate timeline or something depending on how clear the time relationships are with the games and each other.
    • As stated earlier on this talk page, the DGS timeline will probably go to a different page, which Module:Table will make really simple to do.
  • Removed all references to specific real-world events, as they have no real bearing on the games.
  • Removed most of the events with no specific date, including births of historical figures, mainly because it isn't clear when they happen relative to some other events. Some of these dates seem to have been made up or something.
  • Made an attempt to consolidate the events related to each case to one entry. This is where I've hit a major snag. In a lot of cases, doing this depends greatly on how we classify incidents/cases to begin with. Discussion of that is on Forum:Episodes, cases, incidents. This also runs into issues when the events of a case run so long that they overlap with other events, or when events of multiple cases overlap with each other. I'm starting to think this should be handled differently from what I've attempted.
  • Marked events that are apparently referenced in Taizen and nowhere else.
  • There's some other minor stuff, but it's pretty much all mentioned in the Notes column.

capefeather (talk) 23:26, April 19, 2020 (UTC)


I think I would be ok with this format but I have some concerns.

  1. I'm ok with the removing real world events from the timeline, but would this include any events directly mentioned in the game (few as they may be)?
  2. When you say you are removing events with no specific dates are you including the birthdays of non-seen characters such as Owen Gonzales (Turnabout Storyteller)? And does this include events such as Dahlia's execution?
  3. What is Taizen?
  4. I'm not sure about consolidating the events of certain cases into one big slot. For the reasons you've listed above, and because if I'm being frank, I see nothing wrong with that as it stands. Yes it could be streamlined, but this one makes it easier to read/understand.

Franzyfan1998 (talk) 01:41, April 20, 2020 (UTC)

  1. To my knowledge, there are no real-world events directly mentioned in any of the games.
  2. When I looked through the current timeline page, I saw mentions of events with no date at all, as well as events with dates that, as far as I can tell, are purely speculative. If you compare the current page with Template:Timeline, I think you can see what I removed.
  3. Taizen is referring to Gyakuten Taizen 2001-2016, a guidebook containing a timeline of the series. More information on this can be found in this blog post.
  4. Yeah I'm thinking of how to organize this to work well with roughly the way case-related events are stated currently. I want to do it in a way that's easier to parse later when I try to do other stuff with the data.

capefeather (talk) 01:58, April 20, 2020 (UTC)


Well I did look at the templete, sorry had a bit of a time crunch today, and first off, I can tell this took a lot of effort and it does look great. I can't say that I prefer it over the old one, but it is commendable. I will say that if it is implemented I'd probably would not mind to much (I've seen other formats for timelines on other wikis, the MCU for one (which is just jammed packed of information, would not recomend for this wiki)). But my biggest concern is that in the templete, its hard to just glance at it and say "Ah yes these are the events that happened in 2018." (i.e. Events that happened in January 2018 are listed above general events that happened in 2018). So that's confusing. Both have there advantages, but personally I think the old one is a little bit cleaner and clearer. Franzyfan1998 (talk) 04:10, April 20, 2020 (UTC)


If I may add a piece of advice, I think a good (in theory) way to fix the year issue for this templete would be to model it more after the court-records one and have the first colum be the year. I don't know how practical that would be, but I think it would help with the "glance thing." Franzyfan1998 (talk) 04:19, April 20, 2020 (UTC)

So I looked into the manga stuff a bit more (by "a bit more" I mean what was already on the wiki <_<) and it seems like Phoenix's manga is supposed to take place around the time of T&T (2018) and not JFA (2017). The big reason for this is that Edgeworth is the prosecutor for most of the cases, which, if they happened in the time of JFA, would have been during Edgeworth's leave of absence when Phoenix literally thinks he's dead. One could question the implicit assumption that the cases all happen in the same year, but that seems kind of silly considering the cases happen on consecutive months, and it may even throw the timeline of the games into question, which seems rather pedantic.

As for Edgeworth's manga, there doesn't seem to be any dates to reference other than the case on New Year's (I'm suspicious of the veracity of the other dates). Interestingly, a character from Phoenix's manga reappears in Edgeworth's manga (unfortunately, not in the New Year's case), and ages a year. So maybe we might actually be looking at events that occur after Phoenix's disbarment?

I guess barring any last-minute objections, I'll re-add Phoenix's manga to the timeline. There are still some issues with Edgeworth's manga, and I suppose I'll try to look into that more, but it looks to me like it shouldn't be included in the timeline, at least for now.

capefeather (talk) 21:39, May 17, 2020 (UTC)

Actually, in Bridge, Franziska says, "Phoenix Wright, it's been a year since we last met." So even Phoenix's manga pretty much doesn't fit well with the games' timeline. Not to mention the de Killer card also should have come up... capefeather (talk) 23:30, May 17, 2020 (UTC)

I would say there's a difference between the real-life Queen Victoria and the Queen Victoria of the DGS games. If DGS Queen Victoria has a profile saying what her age is, we should use that and not use the real-life Queen Victoria's birth date. Like, I don't think real-life Queen Victoria was alive when real-life Natsume was in Britain, among many other liberties DGS takes with references to real-life figures. capefeather (talk) 17:25, May 23, 2020 (UTC)

Well, looking at the wikipedia pages for these people, it does not seem likely that Natsume's trip overlaped with Queen Victoria's reign (especially not to the extent that the two games suggest). Still though, Natsume's birthyears are mentioned in the timeline. Shouldn't Victoria get the same treatment?Franzyfan1998 (talk) 04:01, May 24, 2020 (UTC)

Natsume's "real" birth year is removed, too. capefeather (talk) 20:08, May 24, 2020 (UTC)


Granted, that is true, but he does have a "fake" birthday. I'm sorry for harping on this, but there are less "significant" characters than the Queen (and characters of greater importance) in this series with weird, undefining birthdays and I don't feel it right to erase these events just because they don't have profiles (or they have profiles, but they don't have ages).
Also will the removing of spoilery information (namely who killed who and whatnot) be applied to the rest of the series or just the prequels. Regardless, why is this the case?  Franzyfan1998 (talk) 22:34, May 24, 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by weird birthdays. The only person who no longer has a listed birth year is the Queen. As for removing culprits, there's only so much detail in these event descriptions anyway, so I kind of felt like the culprits weren't so important a detail. capefeather (talk) 00:07, May 25, 2020 (UTC)


Well I was mainly talking about characters without a rough estimated birthday, such as the Judges or Cece Yew. But now I am wondering if this removal of birthyears is only being applied to the DGS characters and not the series as a whole. If this is the case, I'd be fine with it: but it is a little odd. As for the culprits: i don't see your POV. I think the identity of the murderer is a very important detail. Franzyfan1998 (talk) 18:17, May 25, 2020 (UTC)
I don't think those characters' births were ever listed on the timeline page, anyway, so I'm still not sure what the issue is. I guess to explain my reasoning a bit further on the culprit thing: I actually haven't been sure how much detail to include for any event, but right now I'm thinking the info necessary to be able to compare when stuff happened is enough. capefeather (talk) 18:59, May 25, 2020 (UTC)


Fair enough on the Queen thing. I'll drop it but I think we should mention it in the overhead since it is probably the best example of why the real world events don't match up with the game (aside from the fact that either of the two closest world fairs to happen in England (London and Glasgow), opened in May rather than October). As forthe culprits, I can't really agree since I can't see the reasoning. Normally I'd suggest a compromise of linking the culrpit, but it seems much less straight forward than just stating who did it. I'm sorry if i'm sounding rude, but I'm just confused and trying to figure this out. Franzyfan1998 (talk) 20:59, May 25, 2020 (UTC)

The culprit behind a case is an important detail generally, but I think the point of the timeline page is not so much to give all the "important" details on each event, but to give enough identifying information to an event. I think the victims are better for this than the culprits. A big reason for this is that, since the vast majority of incidents are murders, naturally the vast majority of victims don't get to stick around to influence later events, so there's little room for confusion when an incident is described in terms of the victim's death. There are a lot of edge cases where the culprit gets away, or there isn't even a "culprit" in the usual sense, but there's always a victim because that's the whole point of identifying an event as an incident/case. And then of course there's the whole thing about spoiling every case on a single article or two. I can see the potential need for an easy way to view the offenses of a multiple offender, but I don't think the timeline is a good way to realize that. capefeather (talk) 21:07, May 26, 2020 (UTC)


I'm sorry I'm not really seeing the logic behind all this. Don't get me wrong, the parts that have been edited read well and I do somewhat get the basic logic. But honestly it seems more trouble than its worth. Most people expect to see significant spoilers on a timeline. I know I do. Plus its nice to have a nice reminder of what happened when and by who in one space. As for the cases in which the culprit got away we could just explain why the clurpit got away (which admittedly puts in extra work, but comparitvely it is shorter). I'll demonstrate soon. But if you're absolutely sure about this, I won't object. Thanks for hearing me out thus far. Franzyfan1998 (talk) 02:10, May 27, 2020 (UTC)
I just wonder if it's too arbitrary to include culprit information. I mean, does it actually add anything to the usefulness of the page itself? I feel like if someone wanted to know more details, they could just click on the link that goes to the incident's page. The timeline page as it is seems a little bloated to me. That was why I tried to condense all the information on each case into a single event listing before. That I think ended up being too condensed to the point of messing up the order of events. I kind of wish more people would give input on this because I have no idea how common it is for people to want culprits specifically to be mentioned directly in the timeline. Meanwhile the wiki has a reputation for unmarked spoilers. P.S. I think I'm still going to use the table, and I'm mostly editing the timeline page to leave an editing history before the conversion is made. capefeather (talk) 21:50, May 27, 2020 (UTC)

Randst Magazine and DGS2 Asinine AttorneyEdit

Should we add these? They're technically canon. SwagM (talk) 00:11, August 4, 2020 (UTC)

If there's nothing preventing them from fitting into the rest of the timeline, then sure. capefeather (talk) 00:30, August 4, 2020 (UTC)


It won't let me add them for some reason, I'm trying to add that DGS2 Asinine takes place on december 1 because of two reasons:

1. Naruhodou states it's december in the case.

2. It's ten days after DGS1-1.

SwagM (talk) 01:17, August 4, 2020 (UTC)

Are you sure that these are meant to be part of the overall story and not just gags? capefeather (talk) 03:34, August 4, 2020 (UTC)


I don't really see why they would be gags if I'm being honest.

SwagM (talk) 11:32, August 4, 2020 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.