Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estonia–Tunisia 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   no consensus. X clamation point  05:52, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Estonia–Tunisia relations

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

Contested prod. Only rationale given was "Don't be crazy." Non-notable relations. Countries don't have embassies with each other. No reliable, secondary, independent sources given. No relations apart from just existing.  Jd 027  (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not the most important bilateral relationship in the world (obviously), but relations do exist, and are notable.  See for example . Cool3 (talk) 15:45, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * They signed an agreement of cooperation in the field of culture in 2005. I don't think that really deserves an article in itself.  Jd 027  (talk) 15:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * A significant bilateral agreement means that the relations are meaningful. There are a lot of sources out there on the agreement and others, and I've added more material to the article.  Unfortunately, most of what's out there is written in Estonian, and I don't speak Estonian.  With the rough aid of Google translate, though, I can tell you that the Estonian media covered the Cooperation Agreement and the opening of the consulate pretty heavily.  This is at least two separate significant (and covered by independent secondary sources) events in their relations, enough for an article. Cool3 (talk) 17:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. They can have as many agreements of cooperation as they want, but without non-trivial coverage in independent secondary sources, this topic fails the general notability guidelines. Precedent has shown the the mere existence of formal relations does not constitute notability. Yilloslime T C  16:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notability established the usual way. No argument has been presented for deletion beyond WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Wily D  18:16, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - honorary consulates are just that - honorary, " conferred without the usual prerequisites or obligations". That they signed a ceremonial document is also nice, but doesn't take us very far either. The two countries have zero in common in terms of history, geography, conflict or similar "hard" relations, and a few hundred tourists changes little. - Biruitorul Talk 18:59, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Experimental and utterly non-notable. Dahn (talk) 09:47, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, this article is about diplomatic relations and relations do exist, bi-lateral agreements signed and is confirmed but independent sources. Shared history, geography or conflict is irrelevant, other articles would cover those topics anyway if needed. Martintg (talk) 00:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete having a cultural agreement isn't notable relations. Secret account 11:52, 2 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Secretalt (talk • contribs)


 * 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.