Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of Beijing International Studies University


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   merge to Beijing International Studies University. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Timeline of Beijing International Studies University

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't merit a stand alone article. I tried to redirect this to the parent article and was reverted by the article's creator, who is adding unsourced content and creating peripheral articles and categories related to the university. Do we include stand alone articles listing student unions and clubs and societies ? Given the abundance of WP:EL these look like adverts. JNW (talk) 15:34, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 13 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi there, I've been updating the Timeline lately and I reckon it looks better now. As for the clubs and societies issue, well, I've been away from Wiki for a while, so when I created the article, the whole wikification thing was a stranger to me ... but I guess you are right, and I'll modify it soon. Thanks for the attention. BTW, should I indent here? Corphine (talk) 22:52, 15 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:58, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 20:07, 28 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge to parent article - a separate "Timeline" article might be justified if there was a long history like the Guozijian (a woefully short article), but this institution is barely 50 years old and the events detailed in this article are largely what we might expect to see on the university's own website or maybe even a report for the university management. So far, ten of the twelve references are from the university website, so it is difficult to see this as anything other than advertising. As it stands many of the bullet points detail mundane and un-notable events such as the suspension of classes and the school paper because of the Cultural Revolution, the university changing affiliation several times, the arrival of foreign students, some sort of student union rebranding etc. BiSU was not the only institution to suffer during the Cultural Revolution, and changes of affiliation are nothing unique. Foreign students arriving might be notable if BISU was the first institution ever to do such a thing, and student unions rebranding is about as remarkable as reading about some company office has been repainted. Merge this back to the main article. Green Giant (talk) 22:50, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply to Green Giant — Hello, thanks for your feedback. Indeed, BISU is of a much shorter history, but hopefully you weren't saying younger institutions do not merit a history/timeline article. I suppose it's ok to create one, as long as the events are not meaningless bullets — as for the trivia you mentioned above, I'll explain why they are not in the last part. In fact, to work on this timeline, I read several wiki articles titled Timeline/Chronology/History of *** University beforehead, including those filled with long paragraphs like the histories of Cornell and MSU, and simpler ones like Timeline of the University of Idaho and Chronology of Towson University. I read them with respect alike, and I felt I could make better use of the Timeline, instead of just making long lists of campus construction and new presidents.
 * Regarding the sourcing issue, like most of the universities, the history of BISU is documented in its yearbooks (published every five or ten years), also annually in the university newspaper, and that's why most of the materials are from the uni website. I do have two different hardcopy of BISU Yearbooks, so it is virtually possible to remove the links and modify the citations into book-based ones — if they are expected to appear more credible looking, although this makes no difference in essence. I attached links in the references simply because some of the information has been made available online. As for third-party sources, I'll work on it.
 * Lastly, to address your concern, I reread the article. "[M]undane and un-notable" stuffs including "the suspension of classes and the school paper because of the Cultural Revolution, the university changing affiliation several times, the arrival of foreign students, some sort of student union rebranding etc" take up about 9 out of the 40 entries, with 2 for suspension, 1 student union rebranding, 1 foreign students arrival, and 5 changes in affiliation.
 * 3 of the 9 are presented along with events of greater significance: the establishment of the university, branch institute established and abolished, the first agreement contract signed with university from overseas.
 * Why are affiliation changes relevant. Firstly, affiliation changes are not autonomous decisions; they usually indicate changes in the government policies. Second, as far as I know, BISU is the only university in China that has experienced affiliation changes for so many times — and the changes are radical and influential to the university's development, if you look into the trajectory it went through (Culture Ministry — Foreign Ministry — Education Ministry — Tourism Ministry — currently the Beijing government) and compare this to the changes in its academic structures (not yet included in the article for now).
 * Student union rebranding: this is the only entry ever related to branding or student union, and I don't see why it appears mundane. Do other student unions frequently rebrand themselves? For BISU Union it is the only rebranding event so far. Besides, I casually discovered that the union logo has being wrongly claimed by others and in the meantime a news article on this rebranding was found on the university website, so I mentioned it a little bit.
 * Foreign students arrival: not sure if BISU was the first to accept international students, but presumably, it is one of the pioneers in this, as China was a relatively sealed country before 1978 — and the first international students commenced at BISU in 1981.
 * Cultural Revolution: No, it wasn't the only affected uni. But it was one of the two tertiary institutions not closed down during that period. I'll try to find some credible sources to add to this. Corphine (talk) 10:42, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Cultural Revolution: No, it wasn't the only affected uni. But it was one of the two tertiary institutions not closed down during that period. I'll try to find some credible sources to add to this. Corphine (talk) 10:42, 29 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Just to add a few words — I agree that this article needs improving, but a deletion is too much for me. Corphine (talk) 10:49, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'm not sure why a whole timeline is needed for an article that is not overly long. This runs the risk of being a content fork. Bearian (talk) 16:37, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as overly detailed. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:47, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge to parent article - agree with Green Giant above. The timeline article does not demonstrate notability on its own - the events themselves are not notable, though I do think it is interesting to have the timeline as part of the main article Depthdiver (talk) 04:39, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
 * merge Not really appropriate for a separate article. The only need for one is for very extensive material on longstanding organizations, where the material may be excessive if everything significant is included in the main article. Otherwise, the reader is best served by having it all in one place. And, even when it is necessary to break out a history section, then it should still be written in paragraphs, unless the material is too complicated to show otherwise.  This is an encyclopedia, and it is written in English prose, not a list of isolated points.  DGG ( talk ) 01:23, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.