Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greece–Singapore 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Greece–Singapore relations

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

another random combination, no resident ambassadors, only 1 bilateral agreement and very limited relations. LibStar (talk) 07:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence through reliable sources that the relationship is of much interest to anyone. - Biruitorul Talk 08:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Once again, a randomly created article that does nothing to assert notability in world affairs, and is not likely to be able to. -- Blue Squadron  Raven  14:59, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete for same reasons as the many other country-country relations articles. Not notable. Any information can be merged to either country's article. Tim  meh  !  23:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep pending outcome of discussion at the Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * the above cannot be considered a vote for keep, it does not assess the notability of relations. LibStar (talk) 01:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The discussion at Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations is directly related to Wikipedia_talk:Notability. Deletion could preempt the result of the discussion which could see the development of additional criteria for notability. You have ignored requests not to continue nominating these articles for deletion until the centralized discussion on notability has been resolved. This behavior is rather disruptive. Martintg (talk) 01:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, per Piotrus. Martintg (talk) 01:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * the above cannot be considered a vote for keep, it does not assess the notability of relations. LibStar (talk) 01:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 13:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 13:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  -- Russavia Dialogue 13:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep for now, centralized discussion has started (Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations), it makes sense to see and wait if that leads to usable outcome for this class of articles in general. --Reinoutr (talk) 09:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This should not be counted as a vote, as it does not address the merits of the article. - Biruitorul Talk 14:06, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't be silly, any proper reasoning to keep an article should be taken into account. In this case, centralized discussion has started, so it makes perfect sense to pause the deletion of such articles while people try to develop a guideline. No harm is done by leaving these articles a few weeks longer. Finally, AfD is not a vote and I am sure we can trust the closing admin to weigh in all the comments in a way he or she sees fit at that time. --Reinoutr (talk) 17:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:NOHARM as you state, is not a valid reason for keep. LibStar (talk) 00:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep pending discussion of how to handle these in general. DGG (talk) 17:38, 1 May 2009 (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.