Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bilateral relations

WP:DSBILATERAL

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.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bilateral relations/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Bilateral relations

Pere Joan Tomas Sogero

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about former ambassador, who has apparently been deceased for several years, which describes him as the "current Andorran ambassador to the Russian Federation" despite him having left the role in 2010. Fails WP:BASIC. Lacking secondary sources. AusLondonder (talk) 18:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Andorra, and Russia. AusLondonder (talk) 18:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Luís Pérez Alvarado

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Zero secondary sources. Single source from the Russian government. Completely fails WP:BASIC. AusLondonder (talk) 17:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Russia, and Dominican Republic. AusLondonder (talk) 17:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Denmark, Santiago

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG. No third party coverage. Article simply states what all embassies do. LibStar (talk) 03:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Denmark, and Chile. LibStar (talk) 03:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Chile–Denmark relations in line with this discussion. There are several other Danish embassies which might also be merged into their respective international relations page. e.g. Embassy of Denmark, Beijing, Embassy of Denmark, Prague, and Embassy of Denmark, Moscow. Uffda608 (talk) 08:23, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Chile–Denmark relations. Should have been suggested upfront. This text is generic, not worthy of merger. gidonb (talk) 10:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of Ukraine, Bratislava

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article largely based on a primary source merely confirms it exists. Fails WP:ORG for lack of third party coverage. LibStar (talk) 23:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Slovakia, and Ukraine. LibStar (talk) 23:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
usual, obvious merge to Slovakia–Ukraine relations given that there isn't a claim of notability for the embassy itself, and that most of the article is about relations between the two countries. Mangoe (talk) 00:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Philippe Beaulne

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

11 years after the last AfD, a search for sources today yielded very little despite claims he gets significant coverage. Nothing in google news and only 1 line mentions in google books. Fails WP:BIO. Ambassadors are not inherently notable. LibStar (talk) 06:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Africa, Romania, and Canada. LibStar (talk) 06:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Even looking in Canadian sources, I can only find an obituary in Gnews, then in general Gsearch, this wiki page, gov't websites and social media. Nothing to suggest notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per lack of SIGCOV. There's nothing in the article to suggest notability, and I couldn't find anything in my searches. Yilloslime (talk) 04:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian–Yugoslav rivalry

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Albania/Albanians and Yugoslavia/Yugoslavs/Serbia/Serbians have engaged in various political and military incidents over the course of the 20th century, for different reasons and circumstances, but there is no such thing as a "Albanian-Yugoslav" rivalry in encyclopedic terms. This isn't football. Entire article is cherrypicked original research and improper synthesis of various events. Griboski (talk) 04:47, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albania and Yugoslavia. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:02, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This page was created to explain the rivalry between Albania and Yugoslavia trough the 20 century. It’s just a page to explain the history between why the two countries hate each other and Why did they engage in different battles and how did it end at the end, it’s a connection between all the different conflict they had in one page, so it’s easier for someone to find them. Randomuser2412 (talk) 05:04, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Giving an overview of broad topics is good, but not every topic is suitable for Wikipedia. We need multiple reliable sources to have discussed this rivalry in-depth – the rivalry itself, not just the individual events that make it up. The best way to argue against this article's deletion is to show us the two or three sources that you think best demonstrate that. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:27, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia guidelines and what constitutes a proper article. Particularly WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. This is not the forum for personal theses. The different events you've collaged are not treated in the single linear manner you've presented them. --Griboski (talk) 05:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Military, and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Potential WP:ATD would be a redirect/merge to Albania–Yugoslavia relations. Curbon7 (talk) 11:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An ATD should not be considered in this case, per below. Curbon7 (talk) 22:16, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Redirect~~ to Albania–Yugoslavia relations. The article is a POV fork and an oversimplification of the relations between those two countries. StephenMacky1 (talk) 11:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Switching to delete. Better to not preserve it due to the risk of sockpuppetry and issues mentioned by other editors. 16:46, 21 August 2024 (UTC) StephenMacky1 (talk) 16:46, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a freshly (!) created POVFORK. gidonb (talk) 12:20, 20 August 2024 (UTC
delete obvious creation by and collection of usedrs in the NormalguyfromUK sockfarm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8F8:1B69:CD8:2B8A:A6C:58A1:9CD7 (talk) 15:16, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; on top of everything noted by fellow editors above, glancing over the article for the first time and finding the infobox field that pits Chetniks and Yugoslav Partisans together against Balli Kombëtar and LANÇ during World War II is just ridiculous. Whatever this article was trying to achieve is already covered in scope by the article Albania–Yugoslavia relations. Even the title has issues, because 'rivalry' is ambiguous, so I am also leaning against making it a redirect. –Vipz (talk) 22:11, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! In sports "rivalry" is a known (though not always justified) commodity. In international relations still less than that. gidonb (talk) 02:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete original research; fundamentally fails policy. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 04:02, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. It's just SYNTH and OR. Khirurg (talk) 17:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

High Commission of Sri Lanka, Ottawa

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG. Article merely confirms it exists with 1 primary source. LibStar (talk) 01:22, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Sri Lanka, and Canada. LibStar (talk) 01:22, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The article is a stub, but notability is also not based on what sources are currently there. Here's *some* coverage (though I'm also not sure whether it needs an article):

https://www.news.lk/news/political-current-affairs/item/36619-high-commission-of-sri-lanka-in-uk-participates-in-bedford-river-festival-2024

Cursory google/duckduckgo/books search finds no sources. Mrfoogles (talk) 03:02, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

REDIRECT/MERGE to Foreign relations of Sri Lanka. Dan arndt (talk) 03:05, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Foreign relations of Sri Lanka for lack of writeup. gidonb (talk) 06:59, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sally Axworthy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ambassadors not inherently notable. Fails WP:BIO, source 1 merely confirms details from an entry about her husband, sources 2 and 4 are primary. Source 3 is a routine announcement from the Vatican. A search for sources found passing mentions of her as ambassador but not SIGCOV. LibStar (talk) 23:44, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, and United Kingdom. LibStar (talk) 23:44, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: a cursory search for sources immediately shows up two in-depth articles in The Tablet at [1] and [2] plus lots of lesser stuff. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 10:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. The sources cited by Jonathan A Jones and this [[[3]]], which I archived here [[[4]]] because it is paywalled, may meet the minimum of WP:SIGCOV to prove notability. Prof.PMarini (talk) 12:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cyprus–Finland relations

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreferenced for 15 years. The external links provided are primary. No third party sources to meet GNG. LibStar (talk) 09:27, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Cyprus, and Finland. LibStar (talk) 09:27, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Almost no information about the nominal subject. For example, "While Finland became a member of NATO in 2023, Cyprus has never been a member of NATO": what has that to do with Cyprus–Finland relations? Athel cb (talk) 09:56, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. I had the same question. LibStar (talk) 10:58, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article has very little to say about this topic, and there are no inline sources provided. If, in the future, the relationship between these countries becomes more established as notable, the article can be re-created at that time. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 21:06, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. All the information in this article is already included in Foreign relations of Cyprus and Foreign relations of Finland. Since neither of these articles takes preference as a redirect target, the article is best deleted as a WP:CFORK or a totally unjustified SPINOFF. Without prejudice against future inclusion in WP, if someone finds good sources and information. gidonb (talk)
Harmless but Delete. This is more of a "doesn't earn the space it takes up" delete. Even if every fact in the article were perfectly sourced, there just aren't enough facts to establish that Cyprus-Finland relations are enough of a thing to have their own article. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of the United Kingdom, Bratislava

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG. Only source provided is primary. LibStar (talk) 08:33, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Slovakia, and United Kingdom. LibStar (talk) 08:33, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Slovakia–United Kingdom relations. Both articles are short and the target is helped by the source. Why wasn't this ATD proposed upfront? gidonb (talk) 18:15, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Gidonb. I'm not sure why these articles persist in being nominated at AfD when the can and should be merged and/or redirected. Thryduulf (talk) 00:25, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From WP:BLAR: An RfC closed in 2021 found Most users believe that AfD should be used to settle controversial or contested cases of blanking and redirecting. Given you and the over AfD participant seem to prefer merging over redirecting, sending this to AfD seems to me like the right call. Pilaz (talk) 14:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and oppose merge because the target article has zero secondary sources, no encyclopedic content and should be deleted. No secondary sources at this page either. By the way, AfD is an appropriate venue to discuss merging or redirecting. AusLondonder (talk) 17:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Embassy of the United Kingdom, Budapest

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG as lacking "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Sources provided do not establish notability. AusLondonder (talk) 08:42, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Organizations, Hungary, and United Kingdom. AusLondonder (talk) 08:42, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article charts the significant history of the British Embassy in Budapest, the sources highlight its notability and link with the evacuation of Jews during the holocaust. AusLondoner is on a mindless campaign to delete all embassy pages. Cantab12 (talk) 09:01, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP As such it should be kept. Cantab12 (talk) 09:09, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Swedish consul rented space in a bank and declared it diplomatic premises to shelter Jews during the Holocaust. How is this related to the British embassy? AusLondonder (talk) 11:57, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~*KEEP*~~ There is a link with the Swiss too who took over the site as a neutral power during WWII. Please stop. Cantab12 (talk) 18:21, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

— Duplicate !vote: Cantab12 (talk • contribs) has already cast a !vote above.

Delete unfortunately, many buildings have had to be used to shelter refugees. I don't see any significant coverage that indicates that this was particularly notable that would satisfy GNG. ForksForks (talk) 19:17, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Hungary–United Kingdom relations#Resident diplomatic missions. While a case can be made to keep, as has been done above, the parent article is short and can contain this information without creating a real situation of UNDUE. Whatsmore, the information on the embassies now is minimal and less. Here, too, an ATD should have been proposed and, ideally, the merge discussion should have been used. gidonb (talk) 21:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To decide between delete, merge or redirect. The contribution of Cantab12 will have to be disregarded as it contains personal attacks.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:29, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guinea-Bissau–Spain relations

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. This article is almost exclusively based on the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs website (may have even be copied in direct translation). I could not find third party coverage to meet GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:11, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Africa, and Spain. LibStar (talk) 23:11, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Some fragmented information about the topic can be found in third-party sources. There is room for growth/improvement.--Asqueladd (talk) 13:20, 14 August 2024 (UTC)\[reply]
Comment. Should never have been prodded. Prod is only for trivial cases. This is not trivial! gidonb (talk) 21:19, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. While there are couple non-government sources, the coverage is extremely trivia/routine. Yilloslime (talk) 16:29, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Asqueladd. gidonb (talk) 07:01, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:17, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Monaco–Turkey relations

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod, 2 of the 3 sources are primary. Not subject to significant third party coverage to meet GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:26, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Europe, and Turkey. LibStar (talk) 23:26, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not seem to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 06:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article contains enough substantive information that it serves an encyclopedic purpose even if it doesn’t quick-pass GNG through the Google test.

Furthermore, while I wouldn’t be opposed in principle to a merge into Foreign relations of Monaco, that article is currently a bit lean and unless someone volunteers to merge everything useful in the most of the Monaco–XYZ relations articles, I fail to see how it would be practical or helpful.

RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 11:30, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide actual third party sources that meets GNG? LibStar (talk) 11:45, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're actually admitting it fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 09:27, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per lack of WP:SIGCOV. Yilloslime (talk) 16:29, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A source review would be helpful and I'd like to see if there is more support for a Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - it does appear notable enough for me. I agree with RadioactiveBoulevardier that its purpose is justifiable and it provides just enough information.

Brat Forelli🦊 22:33, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide actual third party sources that demonstrate GNG is met, because I could not find any. LibStar (talk) 04:32, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "its purpose is justifiable", how does this article meet notability guidelines? LibStar (talk) 01:09, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Should never have been prodded. Prod is only for trivial cases. This is not trivial! gidonb (talk) 00:34, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No one arguing in favour of keeping has provided any secondary sources so unfortunately those keep comments will have to be disregarded. Article contains no useful encyclopedic content and there doesn't seem to be anything that can be added. Also, what is there to merge? AusLondonder (talk) 17:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]