Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbadian–Turkish relations (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Despite the impressive Google count, there is not enough info from reliable independent sources. Three sources about the same minor event do not indicate that the Barbadian-Turkish relations have received significant attention, or that there is enough here to warrant an article. Keep suggestions based on hopes or wishes that it can be improved someday and that something can be done with the info are not really convincing. In the end, those wanting to delete the article have the stronger arguments in this case. Fram (talk) 13:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Barbadian–Turkish relations
AfDs for this article: Articles for deletion/Barbados–Turkey relations
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

most of the keep votes in the last nomination were saying wait for outcome of centralised discussions. well 4 months have elapsed and nothing on that front. there is a distinct lack of coverage of actual bilateral relations looking at the first 70 of these. yes the article mentions a vague intent "the desire for expanding a bilateral framework for possible cooperation in tourism" and "they could "provide support to each other" with no actual evidence of trade deals etc. those who like pure synthesis could use . LibStar (talk) 13:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: no sources for any meaningful relationship between these countries. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:18, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: Barbados and Turkey have opened negotiations on Double Taxation treaty which benefits businesses between their nations. CaribDigita (talk) 17:38, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * there have been many cases of 2 countries with double taxation treaties that have not survived AfDs. an actual agreement rather than one in negotiation carries far more weight. LibStar (talk) 13:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: It would be better to rename to Turkey-Caribbean relations. And restore all the stuff in history that was erased.   (E.g. that Turkey is an Observer to the Association of Caribbean States.  It is on the Caribbean Sea Commission.  And in 2006 the Government of Turkey celebrated that year as the "Year of Latin America and the Caribbean" in Turkey.)  It is all still in the revision history of this same article. CaribDigita (talk) 00:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Barbados-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 19:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 19:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Barbados. Ikip (talk) 00:24, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per CaribDigita. Well referenced article. Ikip (talk) 00:25, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Blue Squadron  Raven  06:21, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

Merge with other page I believe that this page should be consolidated with any others pertaining to Turkish relations with other Caribbean nations - if none exist, I think this article should follow suit and be deleted.Waylando91 (talk) 01:22, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep A Google search for Barbados Turkey returns 72,400,000 hits.  The Four Deuces (talk) 02:31, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:GOOGLEHITS is not a reason for keeping. LibStar (talk) 12:33, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep so far as this AFD is concerned. That would the enable the material to be retained and the page should then be moved to the broader heading suggested above about which much more can be written. Another source that should be considered is here. Bridgeplayer (talk) 02:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep I understand that we have so many random pairings of Country A-Country B relations articles that are made but I think we might be able to work with this one.-- The LegendarySky Attacker 03:34, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * where is the evidence of significant third party coverage? LibStar (talk) 12:33, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Certainly notable, although a bit stubby (I personally don't agree with the idea that articles need to have substantial length in order to exist). Country A-Country B relations articles seem fine to me so long as there's something to put in there (e.g. Laotian - Andorran relations is a stretch at the moment, but this isn't). The randomness that Skyattacker refers to is inevitable. Certainly an encyclopaedic topic.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 10:05, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * where is the evidence of significant third party coverage? LibStar (talk) 12:33, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete of merge Nearly no content. It basically says that T and B met once shook hands, and left. Delete or merge with carribean. Manish EarthTalk • Stalk 12:38, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Futile delete Geez, I can't believe that this is going to survive a second time as a "no consensus". The article itself concedes that the economic trade is not very significant, that there's been little more than some talk.  I'm glad that sources have been attempted, but they don't confirm anything that couldn't be in the FRO articles.  I did get a good laugh out of the 72,400,000 hits for articles that contain the words "barbados" and "turkey".  I imagine that I'd get the same for the names of any two nations, or for that matter, the words "barbados" and "beef". Mandsford (talk) 13:53, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Antarctica and Barbados gets over 25 million google hits. LibStar (talk) 13:57, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * They don't have an embassy yet, but I hear that "March of the Penguins" was very popular in Barbados, so that's almost the same thing. Mandsford (talk) 17:13, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Slight interactions do not satisfy notability. Wikipedia is not a directory. Edison (talk) 18:45, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Nidrosia (talk) 00:41, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment If one lives in the United States of America then it is totally irrelevant what relations any foreign country has with any other foreign country.  However, if one lives in Barbados or Turkey then one may wish to know the relations between the two countries.  Do I need a visa?  Are there import tariffs?  Are there citizens of one country living in the other?  While this information may be of no interest to Americans it may be of information to people who live in either of these two nations.  The Four Deuces (talk) 02:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a travel guide nor directory of every single bit of info as per WP:NOTDIR, WP:NOT, WP:NOT. LibStar (talk) 04:49, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete not notable bilateral relations, nor minor embassies. ApprenticeFan  talk  contribs 05:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per complete lack of significant coverage of the topic in reliable, independent, secondary sources--i.e. it fails WP:GNG. Yilloslime T C  06:21, 10 September 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.