Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Embassy of the United States, Ljubljana


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  00:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Embassy of the United States, Ljubljana

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Another installment in the embassy series. No content about the embassies; each article duplicates the one on bilateral relations. Biruitorul Talk 08:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Redirect all to the relevant article on relations between the US and those countries. Belichickoverbrady (talk) 22:56, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Relisting comment: The general precedent with these "Embassy of the United States, X" have been to merge and/or redirect to the "US-X relations" article. Is there any support for doing that here, or is deletion preferred? Relisting to canvas potential alternates to deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 09:37, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. None of these embassies is independently notable. Cortador (talk) 09:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Senegal, Nepal, Qatar, Slovakia, Slovenia,  and United States of America.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  12:06, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete all another non notable set of articles which are unnecessary content forks. LibStar (talk) 12:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * No, I do not support merge. LibStar (talk) 14:25, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep - the one in Kathmandu seems to have enough reliable sources, so it definitely does not qualify for speedy deletion. One on Dakar also seems to have enough sources. Krishna Dahal (talk) 20:12, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Sources attesting what, ? When were the embassies built? Who were the architects? What significant features do the buildings have? What are their dimensions, what size are their lots? What renovations have they undergone? As long as the articles address none of these questions — and they don’t — the obvious approach is to delete, or at most to merge/redirect to Nepal–United States relations and to Senegal–United States relations. — Biruitorul Talk 07:19, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete all All listed articles fall short of notability. --TheInsatiableOne (talk) 08:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete all. Among the 5 articles, there is only 1 sentence about the actual embassy, and it's about a painting on display in one of them. Embassy articles cannot exist unless the physical embassy meets WP:GNG. Geschichte (talk) 17:13, 1 January 2024 (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.