Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Argentina–Latvia 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   delete. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Argentina–Latvia relations

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article prodded and restored. Deletion is the answer here (bilateral relations are not inherently notable; see e.g. Articles for deletion/Colombia–Estonia relations), as this relationship is not notable. (No embassies, for starters.) That Argentina was first in Latin America to recognise Latvia is nice, but could easily have been a coincidence: someone had to be first. Also, link 1 says nothing on Latvia, and link 2 says nothing at all. Biruitorul Talk 02:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete a very trivial and non-notable relationship between two far-flung nations. Gigs (talk) 05:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - No embassies, no references that work, no sources and no notability. The fact that Argentina was the first Latin American country to recognise Latvia's independence is irrelevant to the discussion - someone had to be first. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) | (talk to me) | (What I've done)  09:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete There is no assertion of this topic's notability in the context of history, only that it should be notable based on the title. The scant information found in this article can be merged to the two "Foreign relations of..." articles in the "See also" section to create more exhaustive and coherent articles there. The two "references" aren't even referenced in the text, and only point to news articles when wikipedia is not the news. -- BlueSquadron Raven  14:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Topics such as this can be helpful when doing certain types of research. The only other option is to put text that would go under such a heading into the topics of both countries - which inevitably leads to duplications or one-sided viewpoints, rather than an ability to have a topic which is covering the issue properly. The current text may not be good but that is no reason to delete a topic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.1.175 (talk) 22:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I do not see significant content here yet. The article can be reconstructed when it becomes available. DGG (talk) 17:03, 9 April 2009 (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.