Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finland–Mozambique 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The result was   Nomination withdrawn as it is heading to WP:SNOW. LibStar (talk) 22:44, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Finland–Mozambique relations

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

there does not seem to be much to these relations besides a small amount of foreign aid (23million euro in 2008 is hardly much for Finnish foreign aid), there was a Presidential visit to Finland in 2003 but not much else. gnews search. LibStar (talk) 00:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Mozambique and Finland have a close aid relationship, as noted by both the Finnish Foreign Ministry and their President. Their relations go back nearly 25 year. Mozambique is recognized as one of Finland's long term aid partners in multiple places. Finland and national liberation in Southern Africa By Iina Soiri nad Pekka Peltola is in large part about Finland and Mozambique.--TM 01:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * in multiple places? they're all Finnish Government sources in the "multiple places" source. can we have some more third party evidence of these relations ie major newspapers etc. LibStar (talk) 02:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the sourcing above is sufficient. When the President of a country announces at a state dinner held to honor the visiting country's President that relations are excellent and government sources indicate that Mozambique is one of the 8 closest development partners in the world, there can be no real question of notability.--TM 02:18, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * you'll find most Presidents will say relations are excellent especially during visits to other countries (ever heard a visiting President saying in a visit "relations are bad or very ordinary"?). if someone third party said it was excellent like BBC, CNN, New York Times then it would be more reliable. LibStar (talk) 02:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - unless independent reliable sources can be found to establish notability. Pick pretty much any two countries, they will have relations of some sort that will be documented by their governments. There's nothing notable about that in itself. You need independent sources to show if said relationship is anything beyond a routine relationship between any two countries.--70.80.234.196 (talk) 11:49, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The Finland and national liberation is significant coverage. There is extensive coverage, have a look for yourself.--TM 15:09, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - Content is serious, scholarly, and sourced. Whether average Yanks or average Brits feel this subject is of little interest or use is neither here nor there — it's an encyclopedic treatment of a legitimate topic. —Carrite, Oct. 6, 2010.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep—an adequate amount of properly-sourced content. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster  ─╢ 19:47, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This would seem to be an article about their relationship. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  Captain-Regent  ─╢ 05:49, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep – Anybody here remember the 1970s? (Well I did not think there was any Finn here who had lived through the 1970s, but try Google and its translator.) -- Petri Krohn (talk) 20:25, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * P.S. – A useful source would be: -- Petri Krohn (talk) 20:35, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Finland–Mozambique relations are relevant both in their length and intensity. There is plenty of basis for an article. --hydrox (talk) 00:21, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Carrite. There is well sourced material in the article establishing notability. HupHollandHup (talk) 14:27, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy strong keep - not even a question if this subject is notable or not. It is!.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * see WP:ITSNOTABLE. LibStar (talk) 22:39, 7 October 2010 (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.