Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paraguay–Romania relations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. MBisanz talk 01:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Paraguay–Romania relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
another random almost laughable combination. non resident ambassadors. LibStar (talk) 01:58, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I could find no sources in English, Spanish or Romanian on this one. There's unlikely to be much. - Biruitorul Talk 02:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paraguay-related deletion discussions. -- Russavia Dialogue 12:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. -- Russavia Dialogue 12:55, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Wikipedia is not for miscellaneous information consisting of juxtapositions of countries noting whether they have diplomatic relations. Fails notability as well.Edison (talk) 15:52, 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 15:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep pending outcome of discussion at the Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 00:27, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No sources found which give this any degree of notability. --Russavia Dialogue 00:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- Russavia Dialogue 11:00, 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) 09:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This should not be counted as a vote, as it does not address the merits of the article. - Biruitorul Talk 14:08, 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) 17:05, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This should not be counted as a vote, as it does not address the merits of the article. - Biruitorul Talk 14:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:NOHARM as you state, is not a valid reason for keep. LibStar (talk) 00:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete utterly non-notable, and a discussion elsewhere is no substitute for this one. For those who assume foreign language sources exist, here are the results for a "Paraguay" search on Romania's foreign ministry site. Dahn (talk) 15:11, 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.