Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Current diplomatic tensions between Iran and the United States


 * 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 no consensus to delete, default to keep. May I suggest that "current" be removed from the title, at any rate? We write for posterity, you know... Sandstein 09:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Current diplomatic tensions between Iran and the United States
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article needs a complete rewrite. Besides, an article covering the same topic already exists: United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747. I suggest we keep the later with a re-direct from the present article to the UN resolution and delete the present article's content because all material facts are included/reported in the UN resolutions. It will keep the content's quality high WITHOUT any loss of information SSZ 05:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep highly notable topic. This would be the more notable title. It would be far more notable under the current title. If it needs a rewrite, tag it, don't nominate it for deletion, unless you have a better reason than that.-- Sef rin gle Talk 05:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletions.   --  Sef rin gle Talk 05:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletions.   --  Sef rin gle Talk 05:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Can we create a re-direct from this article to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747 instead? May be it is the best thing to do :-) SSZ 05:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Why?-- Sef rin gle Talk 05:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree that the title here is more explanatory than "UN resolution 1747" but the content is much better in the later case. Many facts are missing here and both documents cover the SAME subject. SSZ 05:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The resolution may not discuss everything related to the topic of diplomatic tensions b/t the U.S. and Iran. There is more to the topic than just the resolution.-- Sef rin gle Talk 06:02, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not sure you have read the article completely. If so, please tell what has been omitted in the later case?? As said previously, any significant new developments will be covered by new UN resolutions. The article as it is written now, looks more like a political soapbox to me. SSZ 06:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment. This doesn't seem to fit for a variety of partially-effective arguments: it's something of a POV fork, it's SYN-thetic, recentist, and so forth. But I don't feel that the UN resolution even begins to cover the breadth of the topic. On the other hand, especially the way the article likes to dig up the old background reasons, what we really need here might be something closer to United States-Iran relations, only split to be United States-Iran relations since 1979. I think the scope of the article is that broad and that focus will serve the article better than trying to present itself as a Wikinews up-to-the-minute update about why X minor event is important. I think there's plenty of material for such an article and it would be much more beneficial to the article to have a more historical perspective.--Dhartung | Talk 07:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * For info, this article's title has changed several times follwing edits wars between other editors. It used to be "Current diplomatic tensions between Iran and the International Community" or something like that. The scope of the subject covered here is broader than just United States-Iran relations. The title, as it is now, is somewhat misleading. The pupose of this article was to regroup all aspects of the dispute between Iran and the International Community in one article. With time, it became something without form and of poor quality. I repeat, ALL subjects covered by this article are treated in the UN security resolution. Topics covered are: Nuclear program of Iran, United States-Iran relations, Sanctions against Iran, Iran and weapons of mass destruction, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747, Iran-Israel relations, and Opposition to war against Iran. This article has no real use in my opinion: it is redundant, NOT encyclopedic, poorly written, incomplete, and POV.
 * SSZ 19:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Deletion not an alternative to improving an article. If the article needs improvement, then improve it. Dhaluza 08:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete A POV fork that violates WP:SYNT. Jtrainor 09:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Concur strongly with Dhartung on this. AfD really isn't the best approach to this article, as what it requires is first to be thoroughly edited to address POV concerns, merged with United States-Iran relations, and finally split the resultant article into logical divisions (such as the suggested United States-Iran relations since 1979) depending on the length of the article and the depth of information.  Having an article about current relations is bad precedent, and the coverage should extend to more than just "diplomatic tensions".  ɑʀкʏɑɴ 15:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Same comment as above. SSZ 19:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep needing a complete rewrite or any other variation of cleanup is not a reason for deletion. This is very important and currently developing topic that will only beg more coverage as time passes. If something needs fixing, get out and fix it. Be bold (and have some balls) people. VanTucky  (talk) 00:25, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article sure needs some major work but the subject is highly notable. I would, however, change the name to something like "US-Iran relations since 2004". The United States-Iran relations article is already quite long and could be divided at milestone dates.--Targeman 02:11, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per SSZ. I can't believe that someone would ask why.  Who the hell is going to know to look for United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747?  I only memorized the Security Council resolutions up to about 1,200. Mandsford 02:35, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Probably needs a new title. Current... may be out of date in two years. What if the US patches things up with Iran? Imagine if Wikipedia had existed in 1987: we might still have an article named Current tensions between the USA and the USSR. &#9679;DanMS • Talk 04:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - I remember working on this article. There was much trouble deciding what events should be included.  Deciding the title alone was difficult.  The problem is that we, the Wikipedians, are deciding  what facts to tie together in under this title.  Our sources, for the most part, support the facts themselves but do not support tying them to other facts to narrate the "Current Diplomatic tensions between Iran and the United States."  This unique narrative created on Wikipedia constitutes original synthesis.  This article should be deleted unless we use supporting sources not just for the individual facts but for the narrative itself.  The Behnam 06:12, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and perhaps rename along the lines suggested by Targeman and DanMS.  Tewfik Talk 19:20, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Strongest Delete You couldn't get a better example of a recentist povfork. See SSZ's answer to Dhartung's comment--Victor falk 15:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * In addition to "redundant, NOT encyclopedic, poorly written, incomplete, and POV.", it is an edit-war bait.--Victor falk 17:34, 16 July 2007 (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.