Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canada-Bhutan 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:42, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Canada-Bhutan relations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:GNG. Relations are extremely minor in nature. 250 Bhutanese having studied in Canada is hardly a large number when you consider canada receives students from all over the developing world. The awarding of a honorary doctorate is hardly big news. LibStar (talk) 15:51, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 18:57, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. North America1000 18:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. North America1000 18:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete The subject isn't notable and the article isn't even properly sourced. The same editor that created this is new and also just created Israel–Myanmar relations, Israel–Sri Lanka relations, and Hong Kong–Israel relations as well. We get this with n00bs that know nothing about notability or sourcing but have too much enthusiasm to slow down and read. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 19:20, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:04, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Bilateral articles require secondary sources which analyse the relations itself. Using a small collection of news articles as an evidence of a blateral relation isn't appropriate unless a secondary sources has analysed them. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:54, 25 November 2016 (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.