Talk:Ongezellig Timeline
I don't fucking understand how does it work. Coco (foer example) was born in 2001, and the series actions took place in 2019, but at the same time they are 16 years old, wat de foek????? Like, I think that Mayamails and Maya's Sweet 16 start happening in the same year, 2018/19, doesn't matter. And that series timeline lies between them, in October of the same year. And yeah, you just made up that Coco Jarig was celebrating in 2017. TL;DR: The new version of the page is such a nonsense and retardwaffel, man! I'm waiting for explanation.
I gave you an explanation (I wasn’t paying attention to the names so I thought you were the guy who edited the article and changed the dates I put, sorry.)
Ok actual editor here, so if you check the dates for the Mayamails you can see "Saturday December 15th" etc. I thought "ehy we could discern the year by checking for which year they fall in", so I did and it turns out that the Mayamails happen throughout 2018 and 2019. This would place Maya's Sweet 16 as happening in 2018 (thus placing Maya as being born in 2002). And the CocoJaarig illustratie (Coco's 16th birthday) as happening in 2017 (it shows Maya being present at the party which we know DIDN'T happen because of the mayamails). Also if you check the dates for October 13th and 14th (respectively a Sunday and a Monday) they fall in 2019. I've laid out my case.
Don't worry, but trust me when I say these are the most accurate dates, I've checked everything three times over the span of 2 hours to make sure everything made sense (for example I misinput a digit the first time and I got 2007 as the year)
Ok, I assume we have enough time to figure this out onwards if there will appear something else on this topic.
So can I revert it back to how it was, or does anyone have to say anything about it?
Let it be like it is now
Evendoe those dates still make more sense (also Deel 1+2 is now listed as happening in 2020, we need to reach an agreement otherwise the Timeline won't make sense)
How do someone know that Deels are happening in 2020? Did Massa say anything about it? We were used to thinking that they happened in 2018-2019 (when the pilot has appeared). So, according to this timeline, zellig sisters are 17 year old? This page is so confusing.
ATTENTION GRABBING EXPLANATION So I'll explain it again: while reviewing the Mayamails in order to add them to the timeline, I noticed that every entry had a date and day attached to them, such as Sunday December 16th and Friday November 23rd. I was curious enough to check if these were random dates or not. Turns out they aren't, because every single Mayamail's date up to December has a corresponding real life counterpart in 2018 (use this website to check the dates https://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/weekday-sunday-16?ext=1), and so were the dates for January, February and March as falling in 2019. We also know that the events of Deel 1 happen on a Sunday October 13th and that the events of Deel 2-6 on Monday October 14th, which also have a real life counterpart in 2019. This isn't no mere coincidence, the show still happens in 2019 and the mayamails (and by consequence Maya's Sweet 16) happen before the Deels. This would place Maya as being born in 2002 and not 2003. And since we also know that the CocoJaarig image depicts Coco's 16th Birthday, that the illustratie does not happen in 2018 but in 2017. Why? In that picture Maya is present, which we know didn't happen because of the Mayamails, BUT we know that Coco was born a year before Mymy and Maya, and look what a coincidence it just so happens that you can place Coco as being born in 2001, and the timeline would make perfect sense.
Can you finally redact the page correctly, you see it contains wrong dates.
alright, but don't edit it out again on a whim
The girls are 16 during the pilot. If Maya was born in 2002 she would be 17 during the pilot, this doesn’t add up.
I got a question, like, are girls 17 years old or not? This conclusion follows from that timeline. If it's true, how should we react to it?
What does it matter? It's not like we 'oon to them. They could be 24 or 80 and we would still shitpost about them. This was for the sake of getting the timeline right. And by the events of the deels Coco would be 17, Maya would be 17 and Mymy too.
>The girls are 16 during the pilot.
Source: We made it up. I explain a bit higher up the reasoning behind the change in dates.
Foenkie confirmed that Maya is 16 on Twitter. https://x.com/DarkieTheHalo/status/1529191502378827776
Massa also indicated that Maya is 16 in this drawing. https://soyzellig.party/zellig/src/1710182789474-0.png*
- How do you know this drawing happens at times close to the time of Deels?
Second link doesn't work and Foenkie can say whatever, plus it's from 2022. One thing is still certain. If Maya was 16 during the Deels, the Mayamails would have a hard time existing, or would need a completely different timeline. See: explanation above
Also we know from the last lore doc that it's Maya's ???th birthday, but we know that the show happens in 2019. And """""SUPPOSEDLY""""" Maya is 16. Then why did Massa put a "???", it wouldn't make sense, unless Maya wasn't 16 during the Deels.
“Foenkie can say whatever”
Why don’t you trust what he has to say about the lore? He was directly involved with the production of Ongezellig, he isn’t some random guy. Just because you don’t like him doesn’t mean what he says is false. Also, IIRC Massadonië has an emoji that’s just the number 16 that’s used when people ask what age the girls are or when people say sexual things about them.
Because Foenkie can actually say whatever the fuck he wants, he's just the janny of a 'cord. We know that the lore can be quite volatile (obligatory reminder of Coco's parents death). It still doesn't change the fact that if the girls were 16 the Mayamails would suddenly find themselves temporally displaced and not make sense anymore. So it's obvious that either someone forgot to make sure that the lore followed a logical timeline or there are 2 universes: one in which the Deels happen and so do the Mayamails and one only for the Mayamails. Again, look at the explanation above.
Coco's birthday in Mayamails it's her 16th birthday. And paypig arts like Coco Jarig are kinda liminal (existing outside of space and time) for obvious (or not that obvious) reasons. Anyway, my point is that Maya went to the first part of the Coco's birthday party (when she blew out the candles), but left for the rest, it will link the art and 'mails if we unironically want to link them. Anyway, Massa stated that not every paypig art is canonical (for example, NEET Mymy), so we have at least two types of the above-mentioned drawings: almost non-canonical (liminal, i.e. without a real context, and multiversal) and purely canonical. I know I sound like a schizo, but you yourselves noted that in the article. Additionally, see what Maya wrote in her “diary”: «all week I was coming up with reasons to do it, but once I looked down all the reasons not to do it suddenly came up. I stood there for at least 5 minutes until I suddenly remembered what I should have thought of much earlier: what would Coco think if I fell down the stairs?.. and then I went back to my room. So tonight I've had to wait until she would finally invite me to join her. I had no energy left to come up with a plan so I just let it happen <...> deep down I hoped I was brave enough to go for option 1 [1st option — she goes to the party until it ends, 2nd option — she doesn't go and returns to her room, — note by me]. It sounds very nice without that boring girl.» Do you see this? It explains a lot. She didn't handle the stress and left Coco's party. Be more attentive next time.
I agree with the paypigs art being non-canonical, but Massa states >Many of the illustrations through 2022 are based on supporter ideas and not all canon. Illustrations in which characters wear costumes are usually alternate scenarios that should not be taken seriously, and the illustration HikikoMymy presents an alternate scenario in which Mymy stayed in Japan. CocoJaarig doesn't fall in either of those cases. For the diary I personally translated them and it's implied that since she didn't go for option 3 (the stairs) and she didn't go for option 1 too (go to the party) so she settled for option 2 (it sounds very nice without that boring girl). And again here's another problem if your version was in place: Coco would be the youngest, and that means that she'd be 16 while Mymy and Maya would be 17 in the Deels. See the problem? It's obvious that Massa wanted for them to be all of the same age (we can base this off the older claim "the girls are 16 during the Deels", which we know that it wouldn't make sense, again see the explanation). Coco's 16th birthday, simply CAN'T happen during the Mayamails.
Firstly, CocoJarig doesn't fall in those 2 categories because you made them up. I have two main categories (non-canonical and canonical) and two subcategories (liminal(???) and multiversal). Anyway, I said how we can link that art and Maya's attests, but you ignored my hypothesis. And no, she wouldn't be younger than Mymy and Maya, you changed the dates of their births due to your assumption, which I doubt and which we are arguing about right now. «We can base this off the older claim "the girls are 16 during the Deels"» so you refused Massa's words? Seems like you are coping. By the way, didn't you notice that Mayamails and Maya's Sweet 16 are kind of "probably non-canonical (sic!)" in the article? Huh.
>reddit essay
Except I have taken the quote directly from the doc, so yes these categories are valid. If Coco was born on December 16th, and Maya on September 21st and Mymy on March 3rd, this would still make Coco the youngest following your assumption. The timeline that is currently used is based on DATES, (the same dates which I've brought up multiple times and that determine the years in which the Deels and Mayamails happen). Since the Deels happening in 2019 is an accepted fact and even the dates I've used confirm this, we can safely say that the dates are a strong point one could base a timeline on. I also added the notice myself: "Massa stated these are somewhat canon" (again taken directly from the doc). But if you've actually tried to follow the logic, you would know that the girls being 16 would completely fuck up with the Mayamails. So there must have been a change somewhere around 2022, because if we were to include the Mayamails in the timeline, the girls being 16 would make absolutely 0 sense. I've went over this for hours, and I've made absolutely sure that the logic was foolproof. Or we can just chalk it up to "Massa made a big mistake with the timeline" which I doubt is the case. Also the mayamails are not 100% non-canon, that was never said, or he would have clearly stated it as he did for some of the other stuff. There's clearly something there that wasn't meant to make the final cut, what exactly we'll never know.
<seperating space fir my wordswordswords
>Except I have taken the quote directly from the doc, so yes these categories are valid. If Coco was born on December 16th, and Maya on September 21st and Mymy on March 3rd, this would still make Coco the youngest following your assumption.
The only reason you changed the dates on year before it's assumption that Coco's 16th birthday was celebrated in 2017. If celebration actually happened in 2018, then the birth dates of the other sisters (Maya & Mymy) will return back to 2003 as well.
>I also added the notice myself: "Massa stated these are somewhat canon" (again taken directly from the doc). But if you've actually tried to follow the logic, you would know that the girls being 16 would completely fuck up with the Mayamails. So there must have been a change somewhere around 2022, because if we were to include the Mayamails in the timeline, the girls being 16 would make absolutely 0 sense.
If Mayamails had been written around 2022, therefore CocoJarig has a canonical advantage due to its later appearance. Why? If we accept that not everything in 'mails can be trusted because of their obvious rawness and earliness, then we would make a conclusion that they have no advantage over other (late) lore sources, but can add a context to them or vice verse (i.e. they can add a context to 'mails).
So, my point is that Mayamails are happening from November 2018 to March 2019. Not after Maya's Sweet 16, but before, so, in the below citation you did one significant mistake you have confused the chronological order of 'mails and MS16.
>This isn't no mere coincidence, the show still happens in 2019 and the mayamails (and by consequence Maya's Sweet 16) happen before the Deels.
Resuming, I came to conclusion you're building present page chronological order based on the profound misconception which implies that Coco's 16th birthday and Coco's birthday mentioned in 'mails weren't the same birthday (I hecking love tautology).
>Reddit space
1) Wrong, I didn't magically come to the conclusion that CocoJaarig happened in 2017. That was the last thing I've changed. 2) Except just earlier someone said that the illustratie are a bit wobbly on lore, and can't be used as a source (plus no dates, the only reason we know it's her 16th birthday is because of the number of candles on the cake) 3) The mayamails happen AFTER Maya's Sweet 16, since those directly reference that event ("I can't use the puking excuse anymore") 4) Because they aren't. If Coco's Jaarig was the same birthday described in the Mayamails, and going by the fact that Maya's Sweet 16 happened in 2018. This would make Coco YOUNGER than the other girls. The original timeline had Coco as being born in 2002. Why? Because of the elementary school assignments which say they're all 8. And since she's born in December, Coco MUST be older. And again they can't be the same birthday for this reason and for the reason I've brought up before.
Also since Massa likes to use real life dates, September 21st 2019 was a Saturday and Dutch people don't go to school on Saturday. September 21st 2018 was instead a Friday. Make your own conclusions.
<Reddit space
Firstly, Maya was talking about boulimia, not about puking:
>normally i'd use the bulimia method, but since my birthday she will suspect any of the excuse I use as me trying to get out of it.
Secondly, as Massa himself said:
>Maya's Sweet 16 is more of an experiment in drama than an official part of the Ongezellige lore. <...> Also, this comic was drawn in a very melancholic period, which can make the content seem rather tone-deaf compared to the animation [from doc]
Also, look there: >The comic was released on November 10th, 2018, and was available for purchase for 5€ [from wikifandom]
We know MS16 was created after the first (!!!) Deel, before the release of the new Deel 1+2 in 2019. As far as I understand, he had chosen Friday as a day of MS16 plot because it happened in 2018, but then, in 2019, he changed his opinion about Ongezellig at all. Sam deleted Deel 1 and, figuratively speaking, “started over” Ongezellig by releasing the second part along with the first. This is the reason of the confusion about dates (in 2019 he moved the date of Deels to this year). And he advisedly (!!!) said that we SHALL NOT trust MS16 entirely since his plans in the beginning (2018) were different from the ensuing ones in the end (2019). So, does it mean that we can miss that date detail from the comic? It will make everything look more logical.
Ok since I am seeing that your latest response was more of a nitpick than outright saying the Timeline is wrong, I think the best way is to make two TLs, a "Canon" one and an "Extended" one. The first will only include the illustratie, the Deels and the older birthdates, the second everything else
Why can't we just put Maya's 16th birthday in 2018/2019 but with the explaining note I have told above (like, it was planned that MS16 events would happen in the same year with the Deels and stuff)?
Because it would just be more confusing. It's obvious that for the girls to be 16 during the Deels, they happen in another timeline. Again, I've went over this a thousand times, and I think this is the best solution to make everyone happy
Yeah, Massa has two timelines, one he cancelled after 2019, and the other is the current one. Also, there's nothing that can confuse readers more than incorrect date placement and attempts to combine those two timelines.
Still, this would make the Timeline (I) have found, to be correct in its own right, I'll work on dividing the two pages later
Ok, so the timelines are now divided, the other is here https://soyzellig.party/zelligwiki/index.php/Extended_Ongezellig_Timeline
Autistic decision. Why can't you put the explanation on the page so we can get rid of "the extended ongezellig timeline"? Eventually, can I redact this page? Existing of the two timeline pages doesn't satisfy me (and not only me), it looks retarded.