Talk:France–Trinidad and Tobago relations

Absurd
Lettuces grant the first two sections are revelant, but belong elsewhere (History of Trinidad and Tobago, Trinidadian English). But the third? How is any of that even remotely "notable"? Do any secondary sources validate its relevance? Does it accomplish anything other than showcase the "rescuers'" Google-searching skills? I think not. Is there even any air service between the two? (And if there were, what would that demonstrate?) You do realise that ambassadors bid farewell literally every week of every year, don't you? Do the pleasantries exchanged at such events make it into Wikipedia anywhere else? And what possible relevance does the fact that T&T "has notified" France "that it considers itself bound by the Geneva Protocol" have to anything? Isn't this enough to satisfy anyone's curiosity on that point?

Quite frankly, the last section is so meaningless I'll go ahead and excise it, unless good, policy-based reasons are supplied for not doing so. - Biruitorul Talk 18:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I removed the bit about the ambassador's farewell, and an editor removed it with a summary stating that it must be notable because it was reported in the media. First of all, there is no reference claiming that; the footnote given is from the Trinidadian government itself, not the media. Secondly, even if it were reported, that doesn't make it notable and that doesn't make it illustrative of anything important. These types of routine meetings happen all the time, and fond farewells and sweet nothings about "deepening the relationship" between the countries are more or less meaningless. I'd like to remove that paragraph again, but I don't want to be an edit warrior. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 14:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The first two sentences appear to contradict each other: how can relations date back to the 17th century and go back only 2 centuries? The 17th century was at least 310 years ago.Yilloslime T C  03:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)