Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Group of 9


 * 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 keep. Missvain (talk) 23:55, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Group of 9

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article seems non-notable and only a hypothesis, without enough notability for inclusion. It's important to note that I couldn't find any sources other than the sources that already stated on the article. Ahmetlii (talk) 16:00, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:09, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:09, 5 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. I don't know why one would think that this group is "a hypothesis" when Jeanne Kirk Laux in the very first source says: "The focus of analysis is the so-called Group of Nine - Belgium, Denmark (NATO); Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania (Warsaw Pact); Austria, Finland, Sweden, Yugoslavia (not aligned) - which came together at the UN in 1965 to co-sponsor a resolution promoting East-West cooperation in Europe."


 * From this source and all other sources in the article at the time of nomination for deletion it is clear that the title of the group is Group of Nine not Group of 9, thus and  should have been swapped.
 * A simple search on "Group of Nine" per WP:BEFORE reveals that there are plenty of sources to meet GNG and to make future expansions.        Sam Sailor 11:17, 6 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bulgaria-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Yugoslavia-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep, per Sam Sailor (also supporting moving the article). /Julle (talk) 20:28, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Given the abundance of sources, there clearly is no case for deletion. Maybe for merger, as this is a stub, but I did not find an ideal target. Keep remains. Rename as well! gidonb (talk) 22:57, 8 May 2021 (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.