Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finland–Grenada 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. Consensus is that a separate article on relations between these 2 countries is not merited. Davewild (talk) 18:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Finland–Grenada relations

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

fails WP:GNG. another Grenada example that fails notability. simply having a relationship or diplomatic recognition is not sufficient for notability. over 200 low notability bilaterals have been deleted. i could find no evidence of significant coverage of a relationship. most of these google news hits are multilateral references. LibStar (talk) 02:55, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Delete Dictionary entry, not an article. Nothing beyond large multilateral treaties. Nothing to suggest these two countries mean something major to each other. -- Blue Squadron  Raven  03:44, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge any salient details to main articles on the international relations of the countries. --Colapeninsula (talk) 08:46, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 12:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 12:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 12:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - I am for the retention of X-Y Relations articles as long as both nations are of sufficient size to justify the creation and development of such pieces. While a piece on the foreign relations of Grenada could no doubt be maintained, no adequate sources exist for the maintenance of freestanding X-Y Grenada articles, in my estimation. If there is material worth merging, merge it, but I'm guessing nothing of sufficient substance here. Carrite (talk) 15:36, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Correcting myself slightly: Grenada-Cuba relations and Grenada-United States relations are two that could definitely be sourced out. Carrite (talk) 02:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - There are a big thing going on in Grenada at August time and it will have many agreement with the two nations, but I can't write it until the event finish. (Kylekieran (talk) 19:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC))
 * one new agreement doesn't mean notable relations. you seem to mistake actual relations being the same as notable relations. LibStar (talk) 02:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * This isn't a mistake because I found the fact and I reference it and also Grenada and Finland have a actual relations and also it said it on the offical government site. So remember this is a real true artcle with true facts and informations. (Kylekieran (talk) 16:03, 4 July 2012 (UTC))
 * having relations does not mean there is automatically a WP article, please read WP:N. LibStar (talk) 02:45, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete This isn't notable. There is no need to have "Grenada-(every other nation) relations" articles in WP, just merge all the information worth keeping in to a single page Foreign relations of Grenada. CodeTheorist (talk) 22:34, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Although there are worse articles about medieval priests and so on, this article isn't marking any relevant contribution from a contexualized source about the issue. FeatherPluma (talk) 07:07, 9 July 2012 (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.