Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bilateral relations
Points of interest related to Bilateral relations on Wikipedia: Category – WikiProject – Deletions – Stubs |
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Bilateral relations. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
- Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Bilateral relations|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Bilateral relations. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
- Further information
- For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
watch |
Bilateral relations
[edit]- Marek Varga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Diplomats are not inherently notable, they must meet GNG and I don't see that happening in this case. Fwiw, they don’t even have a BLP on their local language Slovak Wikipedia, — Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Military, and Slovakia. feminist🩸 (talk) 14:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – Varga has never been elected to any public office nor has he even been a member of any Slovak political party. The term "Marek Varga" on Google may find other men with the same name instead of this diplomat, failing WP:V too. In its current state, the article is written like a WP:PROMO and does not contain anything about what Varga accomplished to prove that he deserves a Wikipedia article. By the way, what is "FWIW"? Is there any ambassador or diplomat who actually meet WP:GNG? ⋆。˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚。⋆ 12:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Clariniie, "For what it's worth." — Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Show the guidelines that state that one must have been elected to a public office or holds a membership of a political party before they qualify for a Wikipedia article in their name. And be instructed that WP:PROMO is never a criteria for bringing an article to AFD as it can easily be deleted via CSD G11 but that is not the case here. Piscili (talk) 13:45, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, it passes WP:GNG. WP:Before was not performed before nominating this to AFD for the reason that diplomats are not inherently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The subject is not just a career diplomat but his country's permanent representative to NATO speaking on behalf of the entire country. The sources in the article provide WP:SIGCOV and those are enough to pass. Piscili (talk) 13:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Piscili, I’ve done WP:BEFORE. As the article creator, it’s expected that you’d vote to keep it, but you need to provide strong reasoning for its WP:N. Being the country’s permanent representative to NATO doesn’t automatically make someone notable. So, when you claim the subject passes GNG, you must provide proof. Simply stating that coverage exists isn’t sufficient. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 14:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete First 3 sources are primary. The 5th is a 1 line mention. Ambassadors are not inherently notable. This one fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 10:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 10:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- High Commission of Pakistan, Malé (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Diplomatic missions aren’t inherently notable; they need to meet either GNG or NORG, which they fail to do in this case. WP:ATD should be merge or redirect to Maldives–Pakistan relations or List of diplomatic missions of Pakistan — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:51, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Maldives, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 18:03, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Maldives–Pakistan relations. Gheus (talk) 21:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of diplomatic missions of Pakistan: Agreed for a redirect as per nom. Wikibear47 (talk) 06:22, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Mark Kent (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:BASIC. Lacking "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Sole acceptable source is from BBC Scotland Business news reporting on his appointment to lead the Scotch Whisky Association. Not sufficient to demonstrate notability as a "mention in passing (example given at BASIC is "John Smith at Big Company said..." or "Mary Jones was hired by My University")" AusLondonder (talk) 08:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Bilateral relations. AusLondonder (talk) 08:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. The CMG is a high honour which isn't handed out in cornflakes packets. Only about 30-40 awarded every year in a country of 67 million people. Clearly notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- As we established at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Shearman, honours, which are routine for British ambassadors to receive from their employer, do not eliminate the requirements for "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." AusLondonder (talk) 12:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- We established no such thing. Only a minority of diplomats or even ambassadors have high honours such as the CMG. You made a patently false claim by citing only very senior ambassadors who do have such honours and the AfD was closed before I could answer. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's not false. A very large number of British ambassadors have received honours from their employer, many with fairly unremarkable careers. That doesn't override BASIC. AusLondonder (talk) 20:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- That sounds very much like WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Who are you to state they've had unremarkable careers? A high honour would suggest otherwise. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- The only instance of IDONTLIKEIT is your approach to the requirement for significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. AusLondonder (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- That sounds very much like WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Who are you to state they've had unremarkable careers? A high honour would suggest otherwise. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's not false. A very large number of British ambassadors have received honours from their employer, many with fairly unremarkable careers. That doesn't override BASIC. AusLondonder (talk) 20:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- We established no such thing. Only a minority of diplomats or even ambassadors have high honours such as the CMG. You made a patently false claim by citing only very senior ambassadors who do have such honours and the AfD was closed before I could answer. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- As we established at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Shearman, honours, which are routine for British ambassadors to receive from their employer, do not eliminate the requirements for "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." AusLondonder (talk) 12:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Meets WP:BASIC after adding references which were trivial to find: WP:BEFORE exists for a reason. Jonathan A Jones (talk)
- The two most recent sources you've added are primary. I actually did see the government sources before nominating but I know that per BASIC "Primary sources may be used to support content in an article, but they do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject." AusLondonder (talk) 20:32, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm seeing some routine announcements about his appointments, but nothing independent, secondary, and significant. And content following "According to the official biography" is obviously not independent or secondary. Receiving an award also doesn't mean the subject is exempt from notability requirements. JoelleJay (talk) 03:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- High Commission of The Bahamas, London (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Based on primary sources and a directory listing. No third party coverage to meet WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 23:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, United Kingdom, and Bahamas. LibStar (talk) 23:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Foreign relations of the Bahamas: Fails WP:ORG (no inherent notability, and there's no inherent notability to a diplomatic mission separately) and I cannot find significant independent coverage. Most mentions of the mission seem to be about events that are being hosted there and not about the building itself. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 00:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Did you mean Foreign relations of the Bahamas? Mccapra (talk) 06:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Very much so, yes. I went down a rabbit hole of other "High Commission" articles for a comparison point and wires must have gotten crossed somewhere. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 19:52, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Did you mean Foreign relations of the Bahamas? Mccapra (talk) 06:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect either as proposed by ThadeusOfNazaeth or to List of diplomatic missions in London#Embassies and High Commissions in London (where there is very marginally more information). This isn't independently notable, but it is a plausible search term and we do have relevant information that we should allow readers to easily find. Thryduulf (talk) 11:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to either article as proposed. In cases like these embassies, I’d refer a redirect as an ATD. Bearian (talk) 09:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Embassy of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, London (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:GNG. A protest outside the embassy does not contribute to notability. AusLondonder (talk) 20:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and United Kingdom. AusLondonder (talk) 20:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:ORG. The protest itself does not contribute to notability. Embassies are often locations of protests. LibStar (talk) 22:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of diplomatic missions in London#Embassies and High Commissions in London where all the encyclopaedic information is located already. There is no justification for deletion though, given that this is a plausible search term and we have relevant content. Thryduulf (talk) 11:54, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Embassy of Lebanon, Ottawa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No inline citations, but the links provided are primary. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 22:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Lebanon, and Canada. LibStar (talk) 22:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- redirect to Canada–Lebanon relations#Resident_diplomatic_missions. There's really nothing worth merging. Mangoe (talk) 22:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: I was hoping the building might be notable as a heritage structure, but I can't find much about that... As now sourced, we basically just have confirmation that it exists at this locaiton. Oaktree b (talk) 00:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's hard to be certain without researching the history, but although The Glebe is one of Ottawa's older suburbs, it doesn't look architecturally significant: one of many random-looking suburban villas. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:47, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Embassy of South Korea, Ankara (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:ORG. Only 2 primary sources provided. A search for sources found incidents like this which don't really add to notability. https://www.turkiyetoday.com/turkiye/south-korean-ambassador-jeong-yeondoo-prefers-yht-for-ankara-trip-539/ LibStar (talk) 03:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, South Korea, and Turkey. LibStar (talk) 03:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:42, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Embassy of Turkey, Seoul (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:ORG. One primary source. The history section is actually about relations with North Korea which should be in North Korea–Turkey relations. LibStar (talk) 15:46, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, South Korea, and Turkey. LibStar (talk) 15:46, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yves Brodeur (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Ambassadors are not inherently notable. This one fails WP:BIO for lack of third party coverage. LibStar (talk) 23:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Georgia (country), Turkey, and Canada. LibStar (talk) 23:51, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep he is a notable diplomat and meets WP:GNG and or WP:BASIC. He has served as NATO spokesperson and there are some coverage about him, though some are press releases or news conference transcript, they are reliable because they are issued by either national governments or international organisations. I found these sources [1][2][3][4][5]. I think more reliable sources are out there waiting to be picked up and if a deep search is conducted they would be found. Piscili (talk) 02:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Weak delete. I also found this. I think on the whole he could be considered notable based on the breadth, if not depth, of coverage. While not current consensus, I am of the opinion that a diplomat who served in three countries or international organizations ought to be considered notable. Bearian (talk) 01:55, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- comment It’s frustrating. There are literally hundreds of articles out there where he is mentioned in passing, his position, his history, etc. They are all in reliable, independent publications, however, there is then either an interview, or it’s mostly a report of what he says in relation to another topic. I don’t think I’ve come across another case where the person themselves is obviously important, and is constantly being asked their opinion on important matters / doing important things politically, without there being a specific article written with them as the topic. Like Bearian I think he should definitely be considered notable, multiple ambassadorships over thirty years SHOULD trump say a one term state senator in terms of notability, but while minor state level politicians are automatically considered notable, career ambassadors are not? Seems backwards. Especially given just how much coverage of what he himself says there is. Ideally I’d like to see the article kept, but can’t hang my argument on any specific WP policy.
- Absurdum4242 (talk) 15:53, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Hundreds of these articles have been deleted. LibStar (talk) 23:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)