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The result was withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:30, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of Xiaomi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unnecessary timeline which simply states the events in the main article in chronological order. In the same boat at Timeline of Valve Corporation. Also nominating the following articles too:

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:08, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 07:09, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:15, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:15, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:15, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:46, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:46, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:46, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:48, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – The Timeline of online food delivery could be merged to Online food ordering. Its content is not in the Online food ordering article at all, nor is it a chronological representation of the article. This will serve to significantly improve the merge target article, which is only at start-class. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:51, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Basically give the short history of the above, these timelines amount to forks of the history section of the main article. Spshu (talk) 13:23, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The AfD on the Timeline of Xiaomi should not be bundled with the AfDs on all the timelines. They do not meet any of the following 4 examples:

• A group of articles with identical content but with slightly different titles.
• A group of hoax articles by the same editor.
• A group of spam articles by the same editor.
• A series of articles on nearly identical manufactured products.

As such, bundling the articles violates the WP:MULTIAFD guideline: "For the avoidance of doubt, bundling should not be used to form consensus around policy decisions such as "should wikipedia include this type of article". Bundling AfDs should be used only for clear-cut deletion discussions based on existing policy."

Facebook has a detailed history section as well as a separate history page, and yet it has a timeline. There are more examples one could give. Denver has a history section, a history page, and a timeline. Simfish/InquilineKea (talk) 18:21, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep No policy-based reason for deletion given. "Unnecessary" is a synonym for "I don't like timelines". Timelines are in fact a valid sort of list on Wikipedia; see WP:TIMELINES. "In the same boat" is an argument not to make in AfD per assumed outcome and WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST. Each article should be considered on a case by case basis. For instance, Timeline of Intel is well-sourced, and a WP:BEFORE style search shows many sources for timelines and chronologies of Intel and their products. Given the apparent lack of research into notability per WP:BEFORE, no apparent consideration of alternatives to deletion per WP:ATD and WP:IGNORINGATD, and a seeming attempt to establish policy against the WP:MULTIAFD guideline, I must recommend keep for all of these articles. After this AfD is closed, if the nom so chooses, we can consider each article more carefully on a case by case basis. --Mark viking (talk) 19:36, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all and nominate separately with a valid rationale for each, if desired. For example, the Timeline of online food delivery article does not correspond with the deletion rationale provided atop at all (see my comment above). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:13, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.