Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brunei–Spain 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 weak keep. Consensus to keep the article is based on the potential for the article to easily meet WP:GNG due to significant relations occurring between Brunei and Spain that should provide good source material. (non-admin closure) ––FormalDude talk 03:47, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brunei–Spain relations[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)

Fails WP:GNG. 3 of the 4 sources are primary sources. No resident embassies, there is nothing to these relations except diplomatic recognition. LibStar (talk) 23:40, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not true! It exists more relations than simply recognition. Please, stop destroying my work, thansk.--Fobos92 (talk) 01:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EFFORT isn't a reason for keeping. LibStar (talk) 01:58, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:55, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brunei-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:55, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:55, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extremely weak keep because Spain invaded Brunei in 1578; see Castilian War. Not all bilateral relations are notable; the fact that these two countries fought a war in the 16th century, which is not even mentioned in this article, is about the only thing that would encourage me to support the article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:38, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: While I agree with Metropolitan90 that the war gives at least some justification for keeping, the fact that these two nations have had otherwise little interactions definitely stretches the definition; it would only be repeating what is already said at Castilian War and little else. Curbon7 (talk) 05:16, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not seeing any significant coverage of this topic in independent, reliable sources. Topic is not notable. Yilloslime (talk) 18:16, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep diplomatic relations evolve and rather than delete articles, it is best to improve them. Aquintero82 (talk) 17:16, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't addressed how this article meets notability guidelines. LibStar (talk) 00:23, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 🌀Locomotive207-talk🌀 00:53, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The 16th century war means that there have been relations between these two countries that were notable. Even if it's not recent, someone may be looking for incidents that occurred between these two nations, and would decide to start from the page for relations between the two countries. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 00:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the existence of the article establishes the baeses for its improvement and expansion of information. There are economic, diplomatic and historical relationships that justify keeping the page. If it is not maintained, then it will be more difficult for the data expansion to happen.--Fobos92 (talk) 21:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as there have been important relations between the countries.Jackattack1597 (talk) 21:33, 2 November 2021 (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.