Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turkish Embassy, London

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 MERGE to Turkey – United Kingdom relations and Egypt – United Kingdom relations. postdlf (talk) 02:21, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish Embassy, London[edit]

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

I'm not convinced that this embassy meets WP:NOTE. Note that there is already a more developed article on Turkey – United Kingdom relations, which is well placed to cover diplomatic ties. All that I can see as being left to cover in this article is the embassy building itself, which doesn't seem notable. Cordless Larry (talk) 02:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page (note that Egypt – United Kingdom relations exists):

Oppose Not a good idea. Embassies in principle are noteworthy and should be expanded. A deletion tag should be put if it was pure vandalism, which it is not. An "expand" tag should suffice to make the article better. Gryffindor (talk) 12:15, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think that the buildings or the organisations themselves meet the notability criteria? And can you point to any potential reliable sources that would establish this? Cordless Larry (talk) 19:11, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. —Cordless Larry (talk) 23:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Turkey – United Kingdom relations for now. If someone finds more encyclopaedic information about the embassy, we can always split it off again later. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 08:38, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Easy merge. Embassies are not per se notable, and bilateral relations articles go every which way at AfD. Bearian (talk) 00:24, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge this isn't a particularly notable Embassy but its existence bears mentioning in the relations page. The British Consulate in Istanbul is significantly more notable but still probably isn't worth an article by itself. MLA (talk) 21:11, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above. Bad precedent. Stifle (talk) 10:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Chris Neville-Smith. The following articles should also be proposed for deletion: Danish Embassy, London, German Embassy, London, Embassy of Yemen in London, Embassy of Kuwait in London, Japanese Embassy, London, Serbian Embassy, London, Swiss Embassy, London.Turco85 (Talk) 16:31, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Like everyone else says. Tried looking for sources but only found a few news stories [1] [2] [3] which don't do enough to establish notability. Why hasn't this been closed yet? Alzarian16 (talk) 22:41, 4 March 2011 (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.