Deletion of Timeline of Asimov's Foundation Series

Comment: The comments above are false.  For example, the first fact stated - the birth of Hari Seldon in 11988 is documented and discussed in detail in numerous reliable sources such as ''http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=M7kfxJJJm7kC The Role of Science Fiction: Asimov & Vonnegut'' which is a critical analysis.  The table of such dates might sensible be merged into the main article Foundation series as this information is not included in that article.  There is already a merge proposal flagged on the article and so this AFD nomination is disruptive to that and contrary to our |editing policy.   The article should therefore be kept to allow ordinary editing and discussion to proceed
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:PRESERVE)

Comment: to Foundation series, and '''merge''' content at editorial discretion. The subject doesn't meet the guidelines for a standalone article, but it is clear that Foundation series is an appropriate redirect target. Unlike what is suggested above it is not clear at all that a in-universe timeline is devoid of encyclopedic interest, and  should be followed. Timelines are not uncommon among wikipedia articles, and even a in-universe timeline can be highly valuable in order to present a clear chronology of the plot, which as in the case of series of several work can be very complicated. As long as it does not lists every details but only major ones, it serves the legitimate encyclopedic purpose to provide a clear, concise plot to the reader. In any case, the merit of including the timeline in Foundation series is not the subject of this AFD and is up to editorial discretion
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NNC)

Comment: as the article is a violation of  and does not meet . All entries here are trivia and/or redundant, so I don't think there is anything significant to merge
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTJUSTPLOT||WP:GNG)

Comment: the first comment appears to be mistaken, in that the Foundation series article contains a real-life timeline of the books' and stories' publication, but does not contain this fictional timeline.  There's no reason to delete this outright when it would be appropriate per  in a clearly notable parent topic
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NNC)

Comment: No #Reliable sources and notability|reliable third-party sources independent of the subject to presume that the subject of the article (the timeline) meets the |general notability guideline. As stated in the nomination, it is an unnecessary |content fork composed of a |plot-only description of a fictional work with no real-world context, which makes it redundant and irrelevant. The timeline itself is presented in a non-encyclopedic format, using the fictional timeline rather than real chronology as a framework, and it is a redundant non-concise plot summary so there is no reason to keep it around since Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:GNG||WP:CFORK||WP:PLOT)