I've noticed a few things about your edit that I thought I should bring to your attention for future reference.
First, chronology referencing is only needed if the information comes from a different publication that the heading implies. For example, if you added information about what happened after Sachi's death based on The Day After, instead of Red-Nosed Reindeer, you'd have to cite it. But if you added a summary of Red-Nosed Reindeer under a heading titled as such, no reference is required.
Second, quotes are not allowed on articles. They should be paraphrased into reported speech, which is better for style.
Third, a chronology on a character should focus specifically on the character that the article is about. For example, if the article is about Kizmel, you should avoid any sentence where Kirito is the subject in the main clause. Everything should be told through Kizmel's point of view, though for transition, you can mention what other characters do in a relative clause or any other grammatical structure that puts less focus on other characters.
Finally, please try to employ a larger variety of grammatical structures, especially ones that don't sound too plain. "Character X then did Y" can be used once if really needed, but it should be used sparingly. We strive to have our articles sound formal and rich in style.
Hello there. I saw that you've attempted to reference an event on the timeline; however, timeline referencing works differently from regular article referencing. On the timeline, references are made for the date (and possibly time as well) of an event, not the existence of an event. This is done because in half the cases, the date of an event is either mentioned in a different publication/chapter than the event itself, or the date is derived from a calculation based on a given relative date (e.g., "x days ago, x days before event Y) and thus needs to be explained. This is also specifically why the timeline is marked as adopted - the majority of editors misunderstand how the referencing works on the timeline, thus I'd prefer if editors contacted me before editing the article to ensure that they understand how referencing must be done before starting work.
My mistake. I was sort of copying the format of some of the other timeline references and was admittedly confused by the requirement to reference the date/time rather than the event/source. Your message clears that up, although it doesn't help me with finding a good reference to cite. Not quite finished with the LN yet. I'll keep digging to see if I can find something concrete to use. I'll let you know when I find something. Have a TON of speculative questions about Kismel, but given the age of the LN, wasn't sure if that was a dead topic or not. I did propose an edit to the timeline in the forums, if you haven't seen it yet.
That's specifically why there's a label at the top of the page asking people to contact me before touching the page. As a wiki, we find it more important to reference the dates and times of the events than the events themselves, as the former is usually more complicated and harder to trace, while we must ensure that the dates are accurate. This becomes complicated without listing the source for the dates when we have as large of a list of events as on our timeline.
A plain reference like the one you added implies that the date was specifically given in the aforementioned chapter. However, I did a quick check through the book and found no specific mention of a date. As such, you have to find an instance where that day is compared to some other event.
If you want to discuss a specific topic, you're free to create a topic for it on the forum. If anyone's interested, they will join the discussion. Alternatively, you could join us on Discord for a faster response.
As for your suggestion, I noticed it, and brought it up on Discord. I'm personally considering whether that thing is even needed on the timeline.