Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Argentina–Bangladesh 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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Argentina–Bangladesh relations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I've looked at all the sources and they do not actually discuss any notable actual relations like signficant trade, agreements, military cooperation etc in depth. there's the usual Bangladesh has potential to be a trading partner without evidence of actual significant trading. 2 of the sources are from the same President's announcement. Bangladesh is one of several countries mentioned in this whirlwind visit, one company exporting ceramics to Argentina is hardly groundbreaking. LibStar (talk) 01:08, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep The article should be kept according to Wikipedia's General notability guideline since the references in the article are from reliable, secondary sources and have significant coverage about the topic. Nomian (talk) 10:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * is there a significant relationship? There seems to be only to be talk of wanting a significant relationship. LibStar (talk) 08:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * But the references have significant coverage, not a passing mention. Nomian (talk) 19:27, 28 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Both countries have relations and there are reliable sources that talk about this. If those relations are "big" or "small" is Subjective importance Cambalachero (talk) 01:04, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - passes WP:GNG due to signficant discussion in several reliable sources. I might !vote to delete it if I could be convinced that wanting more trade is not sufficient to keep this type of article. Bearian (talk) 22:55, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep I expanded this a bit at the start of the AfD. It seemed to just meet the GNG but I wanted to hold back to make sure I didn't prejudice other voters. --99of9 (talk) 23:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * 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.