Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hungary – New Zealand 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. WP:SNOW. Closing per unanimous consensus. — Aitias // discussion  13:40, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Hungary – New Zealand relations

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

another random combination that was created during a spree of stub creation. neither country has a resident embassy, a distinct lack of coverage of actual bilateral relations mainly multilateral, yes they have abolished visa requirements but all Eastern European EU countries now have for NZ. the two countries played against each other in a 2003 junior water polo tournament which I know at least one editor would think this advances notability, clearly not. LibStar (talk) 07:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, I don't see an article here. Geschichte (talk) 07:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions.  -- the wub  "?!"  12:55, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.  -- the wub  "?!"  12:56, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  —Cdogsimmons (talk) 13:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete for a distinct lack of notability.....although that junior water polo tourney make it tough. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:07, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as usual for these types of articles; handle otherwise. JJL (talk) 14:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as the topic fails WP:NOTE. It almost appears that a vandal had created a bunch of non-notable articles by taking a list of countries and creating random intersections. Someone should look into this and see if these can be deleted all at once instead of this massive time-suck of one-by-one nominations. Drawn Some (talk) 15:26, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * We tried. Inclusionists insisted on the time-suck method to save their pet articles. -- Blue Squadron  Raven  16:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Fails WP:GNG -- Blue Squadron  Raven  16:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable. No direct official bilateral relationship shown. This is not the Yellow Pages.Daveosaurus (talk) 08:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I couldn't find any independent, secondary sources that address the topic directly in detail, so fails WP:GNG. 15:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no sources, no notability. ApprenticeFan  talk  contribs 00:11, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * D2,D4 Aymatth2 (talk) 02:33, 19 July 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.