This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Romania-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RomaniaWikipedia:WikiProject RomaniaTemplate:WikiProject RomaniaRomania articles
I repeat what I said in the original edit summary: other than the address, I see nothing about the embassy here. Embassy articles are about buildings, not bilateral relations. — BiruitorulTalk 20:54, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your message regarding the deletion of the article on the Embassy of the United States in Bucharest. I understand your concern that the article should focus more on the embassy building rather than bilateral relations. However, I believe that the content of the article, as it stands, does adhere to several key Wikipedia policies and guidelines, which I would like to discuss.
WP:NOTABILITY: The embassy, as a diplomatic mission of the United States, is a notable subject. It has been the subject of reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, as demonstrated by the references in the article.
WP:VERIFY: The article is well-referenced with credible sources, ensuring that all material in the article can be verified.
WP:NPOV: The article maintains a neutral point of view, presenting information about the embassy and its history without any bias.
WP:NOR: The article does not contain any original research. It is based entirely on published reliable sources.
WP:NOT: The article does not violate the policy of what Wikipedia is not. It is an encyclopedic entry about a notable embassy and does not contain any promotional content, original research, or unencyclopedic material.
WP:RS: The article uses reliable, third-party, published sources, which are crucial for all Wikipedia content.
While I respect your perspective that the article could include more information about the embassy building itself, I believe that the historical and diplomatic significance of the embassy, as well as its activities, are also relevant and noteworthy. I suggest that instead of deletion, the article could be improved by adding more information about the embassy building and architecture. This would enhance the article's focus on the embassy as a physical entity while retaining the valuable historical and diplomatic content.
I propose restoring the article and collaboratively working to improve it, ensuring it aligns with Wikipedia's standards and policies. Your expertise would be invaluable in this process.
Looking forward to your thoughts and hoping for a constructive resolution. – Kjerish (talk) 21:32, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
