Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belarus–Vietnam 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Belarus–Vietnam relations

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

Looks like another random X-Y county relations pairing, fails WP:N.  tempo di valse  [☎]  03:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions.  --  J mundo 03:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - I found a couple of propaganda releases saying the two "should strengthen ties", but that a) is symbolic fluff and b) would indicate ties are not that strong at the moment. Which is unsurprising, given the two have fairly little in common. - Biruitorul Talk 03:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, they have little in common, regardless of what WP:N might say about the relationship. JustOneMoreQuestion (talk) 08:28, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Quite a lot of room for expansion. 5,000+ news results indicates there is something that could be built from this. --Russavia Dialogue 13:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Filter out the mirrors of press releases from the 2 countries, and the results having nothing to do with diplomatic relations, and there are not so many results. Edison (talk) 15:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * What Edison said; besides, none of these articles study the relationship as such, merely interactions between the two countries that you have decided constitute evidence of a notable relationship, in violation of WP:SYNTH. - Biruitorul Talk 20:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not for miscellaneous information consisting of juxtapositions of countries noting whether they have diplomatic relations. Fails notability as well.Edison (talk) 15:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, many of the news reports are about non-diplomatic relations. Canvasback (talk) 19:31, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hilary T sockpuppet contribution struck out. Sockpuppetteer has already contributed above as JustOneMoreQuestion. Uncle G (talk) 15:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Bilateral relations do not just relate to political/diplomatic relations, but relations between those countries which come about by those political/diplomatic relations. Such things include trade/economics, military, cultural, etc, and there is plenty just within the google news results in which to build an article. More sources would also be found in Russian and Vietnamese languages. --Russavia Dialogue 12:01, 23 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  15:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Russavia, see also Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations. -- Miacek (t) 17:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete stub remains unsourced, and i can find no reliable, independent sources that discuss this relationship in any non-trivial depth on my own. Clear delete.Bali ultimate (talk) 19:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Borderline hoax, and per precedents. Dahn (talk) 20:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete the official Vietnamese government view can be found in English here. there's a complete lack of formal agreements, just more friendship statements and we will look to cooperate in future. LibStar (talk) 08:33, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 10:57, 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.