Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of Joan of Arc

:{{la|Timeline of Joan of Arc}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Timeline_of_Joan_of_Arc Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Timeline of Joan of Arc}})

The page is, and will no doubt indefinitely remain, a five-hundred word stub that more properly belongs in a section of the main Joan of Arc article. I have never seen a "timeline" page for an individual with such a short life for which so few events can be verified, and this is borne out by the fact that she is the only individual person listed in Template:Timeline of religion. Note that this is not a WP:GNG rationale and I think the page should be redirected and possibly merged with the main Joan of Arc article. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 07:59, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

• Merge to Joan of Arc. It makes sense to me that a person's timeline should be included in their biography.Borock (talk) 13:57, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

• If anything merge to form a table of the principal events of her career. The full article is a long one. Even the lead is rather longer than enough to give an overview. We certainly should not keep a separate timeline article. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

::{{ping|Peterkingiron}} I agree that Joan of Arc is long, but not unbearably so. WP:Article size recommends A page of about 30 kB to 50 kB of readable prose, which roughly corresponds to 4,000 to 10,000 words, takes between 30 and 40 minutes to read at average speed. The page is at 90 kB at the moment, but that appears to be mostly pictures, bibliographical details, "see also" links and so on. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Hijiri88/sandbox&diff=737216687&oldid=719047300 I checked] and the figure dropped to 45 kB, and according to wordcounttools.com it's a little under 8,000 words. It's not a short article, but adding the Timeline's 500 words on would not be that much of an extra buden on readers. That said, Joan of Arc is an FA as is, and the page currently under discussion is completely unsourced, so I'm not going to openly condone copy-pasting the current page into the larger article without thorough checking. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:05, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

• Delete -- other articles on historical figures do not routinely include "Timeline" sections, so I don't think a merge would be appropriate. This information is already included in the main article. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:26, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

::{{ping|K.e.coffman}} Obviously I sympathize, but isn't your rationale that other articles on historical figures do not routinely include "Timeline" sections more in line with a "Keep" !vote than a "Delete" one? Do you mean we don't usually write "Timelines" on other historical figures? (Note that I wouldn't actually disagree with either of these statements.) Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:05, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

::*Comment: "we don't usually write "Timelines" on other historical figures" is what I was saying. K.e.coffman (talk) 15:02, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

:::*Further comment -- What I was suggesting was that the present article might be converted into a table giving the dates of the principal events of her life, which might follow the lead, perhaps opposite the Table of contents if that is feasible. This should not require separate citations, since the dates should already be in the text. If people do not like that, then the article should be a plain delete. I am certainly not advocating keeping the article. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:48, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.