Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brunei-Greece 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Brunei-Greece relations

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

another completely laughable combination from the obsessive creator. no resident embassies, There are three or four Greek families living in the capital of the country!!! LibStar (talk) 03:25, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom; funny, but not notable in the slightest. - Biruitorul Talk 04:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, garbage. Punkmorten (talk) 10:43, 24 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. -- Blue Squadron  Raven  15:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment For a start on Greece-Asia, try Greco-Buddhism as a source. There may also be an article on Greco-Hindu history and culture. From reading through this material, it seems obvious that the ancient Greeks did a lot of traveling and writing in Asia which escapes the Eurocentric view.  And it seems that China has been aware of Greece for a very long time, in contrast to its awareness of Finland, Iceland, Belgium etc of which it has become aware more recently.  --Mr Accountable (talk) 17:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Comment - Some respect please libStar. This editor is doing his best to improve our coverage of bi-lateral relations and a lot of the articles he starts should have articles and could quite easily be expanded into full articles even if they begin as stubs. I agree though that often the way they are started doesn't help the cause to establish any real content though. With Brunei its a difficult one outside southeast-Asia as its just a small country with no embassies so would be difficult to write about. I think people who contribute to wikipedia or at least try to help it should not be laughed at like this and given some respect evne if this article is a little offline in terms of likely content. Seems this editor is a sockpuppet and you are right about this one but people shouldn't feel discouraged from editing and laughed at, thats my point. We need content contributors even if some are a little misguided and need some redirection.  Dr. Blofeld       White cat 17:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Looking at - http://www.mfa.gov.bn/ - the front page of the Brunei Darussalam Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, one wonders how to write about this country which, compared to most others, doesn't seem to actively reach out and develop strong ties. How does it compare to Greece, which of course has a strong history of outward looking and modern thought?  Since down through the ages Greece is an all-star in foreign relations and trade, and save for ASEAN Brunei is not (compare Singapore, Thailand), what is the nature of the bilateral relation? --Mr Accountable (talk) 18:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brunei-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 13:17, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 13:17, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 13:18, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep for now, centralized discussion has started (Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations), it makes sense to see and wait if that leads to usable outcome for this class of articles in general. --Reinoutr (talk) 09:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This should not be counted as a vote, as it does not address the merits of the article. - Biruitorul Talk 14:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't be silly, any proper reasoning to keep an article should be taken into account. In this case, centralized discussion has started, so it makes perfect sense to pause the deletion of such articles while people try to develop a guideline. No harm is done by leaving these articles a few weeks longer. Finally, AfD is not a vote and I am sure we can trust the closing admin to weigh in all the comments in a way he or she sees fit at that time. --Reinoutr (talk) 16:57, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Random, nonsensical, article of no informative value whatsoever. Dahn (talk) 15:32, 28 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.