Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bahrain–Cyprus 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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bahrain–Cyprus relations

another random combination from the obsessive article creator. only a rather insignificant agreement between the 2 countries Cyprus Ministry of Foreign Affairs: list of bilateral treaties with Bahrain LibStar (talk) 04:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - deliciously random, but otherwise non-notable. - Biruitorul ^Talk 05:16, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as with all the others ~Excesses~ (talk) 12:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cyprus-related deletion discussions. -- Russavia ^Dialogue 12:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. -- Russavia ^Dialogue 12:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not miscellaneous information consisting of juxtapositions of countries noting whether they have diplomatic relations. Fails notability as well.Edison (talk) 15:30, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Once again, a randomly created article that does nothing to assert notability in world affairs, and is not likely to be able to. --BlueSquadronRaven 15:56, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep pending outcome of discussion at the Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the above cannot be considered a vote for keep, it does not assess the notability of relations. There is no need for marting to respond with the cut and paste text. LibStar (talk) 01:52, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Piotrus. The discussion at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations is directly related to Wikipedia_talk:Notability#Notability_of_Bilateral_Relations. Deletion could preempt the result of the discussion which could see the development of additional criteria for notability. The nominator has ignored requests not to continue nominating these articles for deletion until the centralized discussion on notability has been resolved[1]. Martintg (talk) 01:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the above cannot be considered a vote for keep, it does not assess the notability of relations. LibStar (talk) 01:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- Russavia ^Dialogue 10:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now, centralized discussion has started (Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations), it makes sense to see and wait if that leads to usable outcome for this class of articles in general. --Reinoutr (talk) 09:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the above cannot be considered a vote for keep, it does not assess the notability of relations. LibStar (talk) 13:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- - Don't be silly, any proper reasoning to keep an article should be taken into account. In this case, centralized discussion has started, so it makes perfect sense to pause the deletion of such articles while people try to develop a guideline. No harm is done by leaving these articles a few weeks longer. Finally, AfD is not a vote and I am sure we can trust the closing admin to weigh in all the comments in a way he or she sees fit at that time. --Reinoutr (talk) 16:54, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Another one in a long series of spam. I don't see how any ongoing debate could "salvage" this article, if that it what's expected, and in case it matters naught that it's ongoing. Dahn (talk) 17:20, 28 April 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.