Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armenia–Belgium 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   no consensus. Cirt (talk) 13:33, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Armenia–Belgium relations

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

another random country pairing with no evidence of notable trade or diplomatic relations. should be deleted and being non controversial is not a reason for keeping. LibStar (talk) 03:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand - I'm surprised to be saying that, too, but this one might actually pass muster. From this article and a few others, Belgium appears to be Armenia's biggest EU trading partner and there has been a recent meeting of heads of state in Belgium to specifically discuss Armenian-Belgian relations.DSZ (talk) 03:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Searching is superior  to guessing in considering  what should be nominated for deletion. It has the side befit of possibly improving articles, which I assume everyone here thinks important. DGG (talk) 03:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Good guess, but a stopped clock is right twice a day, and this is actually one "random pairing" that might have hit on something. A cursory Google News search turns up quite a few relevant articles.  Graymornings (talk) 04:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Please provide the articles indicating notability. LibStar (talk) 06:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Google News turns up this, this, this, and this. There's clearly enough here for an article.  Graymornings (talk) 09:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - yes, there have been the usual warm handshakes and friendly words, and yes, some economic ties (already covered at Economy of Armenia, and by the way, it seems Germany trades slightly more), but overall, in terms of strategic and cultural importance, and potential to be expanded into a full-fledged article, not so much. These stories document the routine happenings of international relations - news, if you will - and lack encyclopedic notability. - Biruitorul Talk 18:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Once again, a randomly created article that does nothing to assert notability in world affairs, and is not likely to be able to. -- BlueSquadron Raven  16:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep pending outcome of discussion at the Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:22, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * the above cannot be considered a vote for keep, it does not assess the notability of relations. There is no need for marting to respond with the cut and paste text. LibStar (talk) 01:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per Piotrus. The discussion at Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations is directly related to Wikipedia_talk:Notability. Deletion could preempt the result of the discussion which could see the development of additional criteria for notability. The nominator has ignored requests not to continue nominating these articles for deletion until the centralized discussion on notability has been resolved. Martintg (talk) 01:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * the above cannot be considered a vote for keep, it does not assess the notability of relations. LibStar (talk) 02:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Usual story; random intersection of two countries with nothing to say about them and nothing written about them. A centralized discussion need not delay us from clearing out cruft. Stifle (talk) 08:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 09:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 09:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 09:59, 27 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.