Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Azerbaijan–Serbia 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. GNG requires coverage in multiple RS - consensus favours deletion given the wekaness of arguments for retention Fritzpoll (talk) 09:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijan–Serbia relations

another random combination with non resident embassies. Serbian foreign ministry lists bilateral relations for about 80 countries but not Azerbaijan. Only relations seem on the football field [1]. would oppose redirect as there appears to be no relationship. not really rescuable. LibStar (talk) 04:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - the most interesting and notable aspect of Azeri-Serbian relations was in connection with the Kosovo war, where Azerbaijan at first supported the NATO bombing similar to other predominantly Muslim countries, and then did not recognize the independence of Kosovo as it feared to set a precedence for the status of Nagorno-Karabakh. Source: [2] Stepopen (talk) 06:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lacks sources to show notability and the robostub just illustrates the 20,000 articles which result from taking 200 or so countries two at a time. Wikipedia is not a directory. Edison (talk) 00:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No reliable sources adress these non-notable relations with any detail. Hipocrite (talk) 12:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Stepopen's source. I also object to this deletion discussion on the basis that the creator of the page User:Turkish Flame was never notified of this Afd discussion on his talk page per Wikipedia:Guide_to_deletion.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 15:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

that is ridiculous, you can't stop a nomination because of that, you better post that same comment on the 100s of articles that go up for deletion everyday, in almost all cases the creator is never notified. LibStar (talk) 15:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My Keep is based on the substance of Stepopen's source. My comment that you haven't notified the creator of this article is based on wikipedia's WP:CIVIL policy as we have discussed on our talk pages. If you want to earn some brownie points in my book, you still have time to notify User:Turkish Flame of this discussion per my suggestion based on the above mentioned policy.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 16:13, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Apart from a directory factoid list, article has no useful content. No sources discuss these relations. The source presented above by Stepopen would justify a section in an article on the Kosovo war. Johnuniq (talk) 11:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and add the new references. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 02:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete in the absence of any sources that discuss this relationship in any depth. That a state expressed an opinion during the kosovo war does not this an encyclopedically notable topic make.Bali ultimate (talk) 19:16, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Stepopen. I also don't understand why the nominator didn't notify me. --Turkish Flame ^☎ 19:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't understand why the creator abandoned it for six months if he thought it was a worthy topic. So the two countries are both members of some organizations. Big deal. That alone says nothing about relations between the two actual countries. Notability of the topic as a whole is not in any way shown. --BlueSquadronRaven 04:58, 7 June 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.