Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greek-Lithuanian 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 keep. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greek-Lithuanian relations[edit]

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

the agreements mentioned are run of the mill for any 2 EU nations, and most of the third party coverage of these 2 nations relates to sport. [1]. LibStar (talk) 02:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - it's been a while since I've participated in one of these conversations but the fact that both countries have embassies at one another, leaders have made state visits and the fact they are EU and NATO members would cause me to say keep. -Marcusmax(speak) 03:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

this could equally apply to most country combinations in Europe, I'm applying the significant coverage test here WP:GNG. LibStar (talk) 03:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep does possibly meet Wikipedia's guidelines. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 23:39, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please explain how? otherwise this looks WP:JUSTAVOTE. LibStar (talk) 23:47, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - plenty of well-documented bilateral treaties and high-level visits. Bearian (talk) 01:39, 19 November 2009 (UTC) P.S. Sports rivalries count in my book. Bearian (talk) 01:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

but are the agreements (lower level treaties) and visits subject to significant third party coverage? these agreements are standard for fellow EU countries. Greece and Lithuania might have played each other in sport but it is no rivalry unlike Russia and Lithuania in sport. LibStar (talk) 02:57, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Marcusmax. Also, I do not agree with the nominator's opinion that multiple international agreements are unnotable.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 01:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

can you provide evidence of significant third party coverage of these relations? these are standard bilateral agreements between almost all EU nations, some other EU nations bilateral articles have previously been deleted or redirected. LibStar (talk) 01:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP requires that a topic be covered by reliable sources that independent of the subject before we have an article about it. This article cites no such sources, and I could not find any either. Precedent is that simply having embassies is not enough to meet the bar of WP:N. Yilloslime ^T_C 06:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Thay Greece never officially recognised the annexation of the Baltic states by the USSR, has distinct encyclopedic value, it's expandable, and lifts this article out of mere trivial x-y relations Power.corrupts (talk) 12:07, 25 November 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.