Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Argentina–Iceland relations

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. BJ^Talk 00:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Argentina–Iceland relations

another completely laughable combination (one of the worst I've seen) from the obsessive creator. non resident embassies and google news search turns up nothing except that both countries share economic problems [1]. and if you're going to say keep with the standard text of wait for centralised discussion, seriously ask yourself is Iceland-Argentina notable? LibStar (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails notability and not a directory or random collection of information. Better to have 200 sections or articles on "Foreign relations of ..." for each sovereign nation than about 20,000 random pairings which merely regurgitate information from the websites of the foreign ministries, and which will quickly become stale and outdated. Edison (talk) 15:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for utter lack of notability through reliable sources. - Biruitorul ^Talk 16:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A brief news search "iceland+and+argentina"&btnG=Search+Archives&hl=en&ned=us&um=1 and "argentina+and+iceland"&hl=en&ned=us&um=1&sa=N&start=0 doesn't show much. Both nations have a large fishing industry; but one is in the North Atlantic, the other in the South Pacific, so there's no overlap of territory, and unless there's a O-FEC that is to fish as OPEC is to petroleum, I don't see that they work together. Mandsford (talk) 21:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question. Argentina in the Pacific? Phil Bridger (talk) 00:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - this is a "maybe" - I'd need to do more research. I found a 1944 state visit.[2] Bearian (talk) 00:22, 30 April 2009 (UTC) Also a 1958 article.[3]. Bearian (talk) 00:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, not likely to be found so. This article borders on being a mere dictionary entry. --BlueSquadronRaven 17:18, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing administrator please note this editor has copy and pasted the exact same delete reason on Over forty other AfDs today. Two weeks ago editor copy and pasted the same reason in 15 AfDs in less than 3 minutes. Ikip (talk) 09:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included on the and Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations/Bilateral relations task force/Deletion page(s), which are related to this deletion discussion. User:Ikip
Delete this unsourced stub, for which i can find no reliable sources that would begin to establish this is a notable relationship.Bali ultimate (talk) 13:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable intersection of countries. Nothing more to state than the location of embassies, which is a violation of WP:NOTDIR. Stifle (talk) 13:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on sources I've found. Bearian (talk) 20:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC) Wow, the deeper I go into Googleland, the more ifnormation I find. Please see the artcile as it now appears. Bearian (talk) 21:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.