Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iraq–Malta 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:12, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Iraq–Malta relations

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

I am also nominating:
 * -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:51, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

As precedent shows, we don't need an article on every one of 203C2 = 20503 possible Country X-Country Y relations if nothing has really taken place between them. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete all but one - Everyone with the exception of Iraq - Singapore due to the fact that singapore has conducted military exercises in Iraq and participated in the Iraq War. Also Singapore appears to have helped with the reconstruction of Iraq. Some links include but are not limited to, Malaysia Star Article on how singapore is sending planes and ships to Iraq, tibbit of a LA times article, Forbes article on Singapore sending tanker to Iraq, Another Forbes article talking about a different deployment. I might also add that having real embassies helps Singapore-Iraq. As for the others, they don't appear to be notable. -  Marcusmax ( speak ) 01:10, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Uh-oh Serbia may have some notability, but not sure yet. - Marcusmax ( speak ) 01:14, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * As seen in Articles for deletion/Chile-Colombia relations, having mutual embassies is not grounds for inclusion. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Even if, I have provided some third party sources that can prove a Military relationship as well as political. - Marcusmax ( speak ) 01:33, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Okay, but that information needs to be included in the article... A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 05:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand that completely and I assure you in the very near future the Singapore article will have a nive re-write. - Marcusmax ( speak ) 20:34, 14 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - Now I emphasize we also keep the Serbia article as well per some new sources I have found Fox News article on "Multimillion Arms Deal", Article on Military ties, Defense news article on closer relations, Article on "Military Alliance", Article on Defense ties so I urge a strong keep on the Serbia-Iraq and reiterate my support for the Singapore-Iraq. Anyone who wants me to do a re-write as I have done on others is welcome to ask and I can easily incorporate these. -  Marcusmax ( speak ) 01:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I took Serbia off the list. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It still has its article for deletion banner on that page. The one who added it, must be the one to remove it, or its still listed.   D r e a m Focus  01:31, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Iraq-Malta relations and Cyprus-Iraq relations; Keep the other two – per all of the above. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 05:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete the Iraq-Malta and Cyprus-Iraq pages. Keep the Iraq-Singapore one, due to the evidence found by Marcusmax (although this needs to be added to the article). DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) | (talk to me) | (What I've done)  09:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Iraq-Malta and Cyprus-Iraq, provided no additional information turns up. Keep: Serbia-Iraq and Iraq-Singapore per above.Jo7hs2 (talk) 18:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've removed Iraq-Singapore relations. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete both remaining nominees, as no hint of notability has been shown for either. - Biruitorul Talk 01:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete not sure how many nominees remain. But as far as i'm concerned, they're all deserving of deletion. In all cases, no notable relationship identified via any reliable sources.Bali ultimate (talk) 23:00, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep If you search in the native languages of those two nations, you could surely find news articles about the relationship between them. Is it realistic to assume there has been absolutely no news coverage about trade or diplomatic meetings for decades?  If we knew the names of all the big newspapers in those two countries, and did a proper search, surely we'd find something.   D r e a m Focus  01:33, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, the old "sources might exist, we just need some enterprising Maltese to go to the local Birkirkara archives of In-Nazzjon, merrily poring over back issues until he finds disparate bits about ancient foreign ministers' visits to Baghdad and comes back here, gleefully expanding this article" - nice thought, but let's be serious. - Biruitorul Talk 14:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete at least Iraq-Malta, which seems really hopeless.--Aldux (talk) 14:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete both. Nothing more to say than X has an embassy/mission in Y, which fails WP:NOTDIR. Stifle (talk) 08:53, 17 April 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.