Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Britons in Egypt

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. There seems to be consensus that the page in its current state is not useful as an encyclopedic article, especially considering the ill-defined scope and noting that there are other articles which cover similar topics. Would be open to restore to draft if someone has clear intention/plans to work on it, otherwise that is simply delaying deletion with no real purpose. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Britons in Egypt[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

A single ref on the page for many years - nothing much to suggest that meets the criteria of inclusion. Of course there has been a long story of association between Egypt and Britons, but there are other pages which cover that. JMWt (talk) 08:31, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with deletion, not a useful article, it essentially contains no information. BHC (talk) 09:15, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Egypt, and United Kingdom. JMWt (talk) 08:31, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:59, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with deletion, it has no useful content as already stated.
Ldm1954 (talk) 04:20, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We have articles with one sentence so I'm not sure about the judgment that the article content here is not "useful". Usefulness is not a criteria typically used in deletion discussion. Lots of notable subjects may not be useful. How about evauating sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:24, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's possibly expandable from the Whidden 2010 source at Egypt–United Kingdom relations#Further reading. But I have a life. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 16:25, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The title could cover anything from tourists to invaders and the minimal content does little to elucidate the subject. Taken broadly the subject is just an unnecessary fork of UK-Egyptian relations. Taken narrowly, i.e. British expatriates living in Egypt, it is niche enough to need citations to reliable sources to establish notability. Either way, delete what we have here and start again from scratch if desired (probably at a different, clearer title). Eluchil404 (talk) 04:58, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move to the Draft Space. More work needs to be done for the topic is notable! Micheal Kaluba (talk) 17:27, 24 November 2023 (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.