DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

untitled

[edit]

When I originally started this page it was immediately deleted by NawlinWiki. NawlinWiki cited that the event is only held at a single university and is not notable. Inward bound is an event held between six of the residential halls and colleges at the Australian National University each of which has a page on Wikipedia:

Bruce Hall, Burgmann College, Burton & Garran Hall, Fenner Hall, John XXIII College and Ursula Hall.

For this reason, I think that it is notable. Having said that, is there a precedent for such events?

Anyway, I would appreciate it if you would justify your actions further.--Mozzie 00:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • This looks to me like it's probably a non-notable event, an intramural event between residental halls. However, it seems to have run for quite a while. The key is probably whether there has been independent, reliable description of it outside wikipedia -- that probably means in the news media, but blogs and forums are not likely to count (see WP:RS). Without meaning offense, I would suggest taking a look at WP:NFT, which covers things like this. You have a better case than most, but take a look at the examples there of things that can be covered, and see if you can provide sources to meet WP:V. You've got a few days before the prod deletion runs its course. bikeable (talk) 04:06, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No offence taken, thanks for your helpful comments. I agree that this page is probably a weak keep. I think it would be ideal to merge it into another page. But there doesn’t appear to be an appropriate page to merge it into. Although I don’t quite know if I would say it is as big as the Oxford and Cambridge boat race, which has a large television audience.

Anyway I will address three criteria, notability, WP:NFT, and verifiability separately:

On notability, IB has appeared in the media on many occasions, however it appears that it doesn’t appear on Google. I feel that this is notable because it is a unique example of a tradition in an Australian University. Further many other universities have tradition pages for traditions that are just as confined to a single university. Just search for university tradition or college tradition. These traditions are equally as notable.

On WP:NFT, the guideline says:

Resist the temptation to write about the new, great thing you and/or your friends just thought up.

This has been running for 44 years. Each year almost 200 people compete, running distances of up to 120km. The lead-up to the event involves months of running training. The actual event involves a large amount of logistics getting runners to dropoff points, and setting up the endpoint at distant locations. This isn’t something that was recently invented for fun.

On verifiability, IB has not appeared in a high standard reliable source. I have referenced to a third party independent IB guide which contains a fairly large amount of detail on the event. Note that WP:V says that:

Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources...

I think that the IB guide is a reliable source. (Can people access it?). It might not be the New York Times, but its content is not disputed, nor is it contentious. For this reason a highly reliable source is not required. Indeed, WP:V goes on to say that:

Sources should also be appropriate to the claims made: outlandish claims require stronger sources.

This topic is completely non-outlandish, so the opposite should be the case. The source should not need to be incredibly strong.

I think that this is a notable topic because it is a unique event, and a unique example of a tradition in an Australian university. It has been published in the media, although not on the internet. With time I believe it can become high quality content. It is definitely not a case of WP:NFT. --Mozzie 05:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete

[edit]

Do not delete this article. The reason given for deletion is unfounded and pathetic. The ANU Inward Bound is not something made up at "School" it is the oldest Sporting Competition between the Halls and colleges of the ANU and plays a major role in student life. It is reported widely in the Canberra Press and University papers in and journals in Australia. Australia is young country and its events and history will not be as old as some, but that does not give others the right to judge them unworthy.

If you delete this article for the reason cited, then you must also delete the article on the Oxford /Cambridge Boat Race. After all this to is a sporting competition between University Colleges...something made up in "School".


Just to let you know that Inward Bound is indeed on the net and on Google. Go to UK Google (google.co.uk) or Google Australia (google.com.au) (yes there is a world outside the USA) and type in Inward Bound or Inward Bound ANU and you will get pages of the stuff, usually linked to the college teams. On Google images there are about 2 pages of images. I support keeping Inward bound (IB) on Wiki as it is a very Australian Uni thing, but don't see why you need the internet as proof, it is not a fixed/trusted source for any academic purpose (or is that the historian snob in me coming out!), but some of you wanted to see it on the internet and there it is on Google!

Cheers,

--- There is an cup that goes to the winning college, which is inscribed with the winning college at each year. Anyone at the currently-winning hall in Canberra is invited to update the winning colleges using that cup as the original, trusted source. BTW, I second that Inward Bound is a major event that deserves to be more widely known. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.107.241.186 (talk) 04:46, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

COI tag (August 2021)

[edit]

Duck COI accounts User:Ib.admin, plus the overlydetailed style with lack of sources, and edit history Widefox; talk 10:29, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and Tags

[edit]

There are a few sources that most of the information ultimately comes from.

With that in mind, I think many of the tags could be removed if these citations were properly added:

Reverting some recent removals

User Jdcooper recently removed large sections of the page. While much of what was removed was certainly low quality, some sections, in particular the "event outline and rules" section, probably qualify to be re-added if correctly cited (i.e. from anuinwardbound.com). Tobes2 (talk) 02:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The ANU Inward Bound website is clearly a self-published source. I am not convinced that this page is notable as there is almost no independent secondary sourcing provided. I'm replacing the tags, at least, but I still maintain the material which I removed is not sufficiently encyclopedic to warrant inclusion here. I'll leave it for now pending other opinions or improved sources being found. Jdcooper (talk) 13:29, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

[edit]

Further to the above discussion, I would say the best thing for this article would be to merge it with Australian National University (where it is not currently mentioned at all). There is a large amount of trivia here (results, etc.) which is not of encyclopedic interest, but there would be about enough properly sourced information to summarise the outline of the event at the parent article, which seems like a better solution. Jdcooper (talk) 13:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]