User talk:MBihun/Archives/2021/April

Diplomatic mission of Ukraine in the UK
I was wondering if it would be notable enough (and allowed) if I created a new article, called "Diplomatic mission of Ukraine to the United Kingdom" containing information on the Embassy in London and the Consulates in Edinburgh and London. It could also include further information such as the opening of the diplomatic missions (I have a source from the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs providing this information).

This article would merge the current Embassy of Ukraine, London article into this one article (the Edinburgh Consulate doesn't have its own article, as far as I am aware).

If the topic doesn't warrant its own article, no problem! Thank you! MBihun (talk) 17:37, 12 April 2021 (UTC)


 * If the most important source you have about the consulates is from the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs itself, it's possible the consulates aren't notable on their own for an article. I'm not a subject expert, but I would go with the WP:general notability guideline and base the decision on whether you can find significant coverage in sources independent of the subject, such as books or news reports.--Anon423 (talk) 07:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * @Anon423 I don't really plan to make an article just for the Consulates, I want to make an article with all of Ukraine's diplomatic missions to the UK (these are two Consulates in London and Edinburgh and the embassy in London). MBihun (talk) 12:13, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, my first thought would be the usual question: Do reliable, independent secondary sources speak of the subject as an entity? If the literature only covers the Embassy of Ukraine, London or the Edinburgh Consulate separately, I'd lean away from synthesizing the two into one article about the Diplomatic mission of Ukraine to the United Kingdom. It would be akin to an individually notable husband and wife pair, where unless sources speak of the family as its own collective subject, I wouldn't merge their articles. I don't think it's our place as Wikipedians to group things that aren't considered in the same breath by our sources, or conversely to split things that are typically mentioned in the context of a larger grouping. You can do whatever you want though; this is my opinion and interpretation of the guidelines. The worst that can happen is pushback from someone more familiar with or opinionated about the conventions. --Anon423 (talk) 03:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I will have a look later on and see which format will be the best. MBihun (talk) 06:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)