Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lesotho–Turkey 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:38, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lesotho–Turkey 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. No embassies or agreements. The state visits were part of multilateral forums. The trade is tiny at less than $2 million. The reading list contains no mentions of Turkey. LibStar (talk) 02:24, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Africa, and Turkey. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are two bilateral agreements that I could verify. There was a Commercial and Economic Cooperation Agreement signed in 2016 ([1]) and an Air Transport Agreement in 2018 ([2]). Apparently the 2016 agreement was ratified in Turkey in 2021 in an attempt to thwart Gülenist influence in Lesotho ([3]). The 2018 agreement was apparently a result of the Lesotho MFA's visit to Turkey [4]. --GGT (talk) 20:10, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll go for a weak delete here. The coverage that is there in terms of the agreements hardly qualifies for WP:SIGCOV. The current article content probably consists of original research (hard to believe that bilateral relations would deteriorate due to a coup in Lesotho). The treaties can be briefly mentioned in the foreign relations tables for each country. If someone genuinely wants to work on this and we find that the content is too detailed for those articles, I'm happy to reconsider. --GGT (talk) 17:44, 5 March 2022 (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.