Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bangladeshi Ambassador to Portugal


 * 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 merge to Bangladesh–Portugal relations and Bangladesh–Bhutan relations, respectively. bd2412 T 03:30, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Bangladeshi Ambassador to Portugal

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:GNG. just a list of non notable ambassadors. also nominating: AfDs for this article: 
 * Bangladeshi Ambassador to Bhutan LibStar (talk) 22:53, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 00:06, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bhutan-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 00:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 00:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 00:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * vote deferred for now - This is a very important and profound AFD. There are many articles in the mold of "Country X Ambassador to Country Y". While people may write "other crap exists", we should try to be uniform, not arbitrary, and delete some but not others. Another issue is that there may be few or no reliable sources about the list of ambassadors to a certain country. If there are none, then we are almost doing original research by cherry picking information from various sources to make up an article. This is different from "List of US Presidents" where there are reliable sources with lists. There is probably no "List of US Presidents who hated spinach" even though you might be able to find an article that President X hated spinach and another article that mentions President Y doesn't like spinach. AGrandeFan (talk) 18:46, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * "Cherry picking information from various sources to make up an article" is called research and is how you are supposed to write an article. WP:Synthesis is about combining facts to come to a new conclusion not in the original source material. If you believed a person was born on Mars instead of Earth, you would pick various statements to support your new conclusion. --RAN (talk) 01:27, 17 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment- Bangladesh and India are the only countries in the world to have ambassadors stationed in Bhutan.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 12:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 12:18, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Note that two articles are nominated for deletion herein.
 * Keep- keep Bangladeshi Ambassador to Bhutan as the article is sourced and notable because Bangladesh and India are the only countries to have resident ambassadors in Bhutan and the close ties between Bangladesh and Bhutan. Two of the ambassadors have their own pages and a red link does not mean the individual is not notable it just means an article has not been created. Neutral on the Bangladeshi Ambassador to Portugal article.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 16:25, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:04, 17 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep- Not enough trusted sources to ensure article notability at the moment. But relations between the two countries are notably important in South Asia, and thus should be listed but improvement on sourcing is adviced. Tart (talk) 12:53, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Not enough trusted sources to ensure article notability at the moment.  is a reason for deletion. the notability of relations is covered in another article. LibStar (talk) 21:34, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * improvement on sourcing please demonstrate where these sources are. LibStar (talk) 23:48, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kagundu  Talk To Me  03:44, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:49, 25 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete all The optimal solution here is to keep this content at Foreign relations of Bangladesh until such point that there's so much well-sourced content that it's ready to be spun-out. A standalone article should not exist until it must. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 15:17, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm confused. If the optimal solution would be to keep the content at Foreign relations of Bangladesh (and I'm leaning more or less towards agreement with you on that), why is your recommendation delete rather than merge? --Worldbruce (talk) 01:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've been screwed in the past where I !voted merge, some !voted delete, but the largest single group !voted keep. The closer determined keep was consensus because they didn't see merge and delete as essentially the same conclusion (that a standalone article should not exist). There are already misguided keep !votes present here, so pushing for deletion is a clearer position than merge. Also, if the split was between keep and merge, the closer could determine keep and ask for a merge discussion, which also wastes time. Finally, you don't need permission to copy material from here and paste it somewhere else so long as you properly attribute. I only !vote merge if the consensus is clearly trending for merge because otherwise it's too risky as a matter of game theory. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 16:22, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to Foreign relations of Bangladesh per Worldbruce. I would note to closing admin that, game theory aside, Chris troutman's vote could be counted as an additional merge. Ifnord (talk) 15:31, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Bangladesh–Portugal relations may be a better merge/redirect target than Foreign relations of Bangladesh for Bangladeshi Ambassador to Portugal, but either would be fine. Keeping a stand-alone page for this is not. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 19:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge the main article to Bangladesh–Portugal relations. It's clearly part of that topic and the list is not large enough to make the article bloated. I'm less sure about the other one given the geographic proximity of the countries.  Hut 8.5  22:19, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Bangladesh–Portugal relations. Not enough meat to justify its own article, but fits in nicely with B-P relations. TimTempleton (talk) (cont)  22:36, 2 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete both and Merge to Bangladesh-Portugal/Bhutan relations per Power and Troutman. Both are good examples of WP:LISTCRUFT, and serve no encyclopedic purpose separated from their main articles. Bangladeshi Ambassador to Portugal in particular falls under the Creation Guide portion of WP:CSC. If either of these lists can be expanded to the point that they dominate the article, then it may be time to spin them off, but in their current state they are not nearly large or well sourced enough to merit their own article. Ham  tech  person  00:22, 3 November 2017 (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.