Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Japan–Lebanon 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 19:19, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Japan–Lebanon relations

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

minor relations, minor level of trade (given that Japan exports to almost everywhere) Interesting to note: "Number of Japanese nationals residing in Lebanon: 72 (October 2007) Number of Lebanese nationals residing in Japan: 98 (December 2007) " http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/middle_e/lebanon/index.html LibStar (talk) 05:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep Yet another disruptive nomination where the nominator has not even consulted WP:BEFORE. Ever here of the Japanese Red Army? Will an admin please put User:LibStar under restrictions for the nominating of articles for AfD. --Russavia Dialogue 08:39, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: As Japan is a major power its bilateral relations with any other nation are inherently notable--even if, as may be the case here, there is not that much to say about them. TallNapoleon (talk) 09:57, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete unless multiple, independent, in-depth sources are found. Russavia, what would you like this article to say? "Japan and Lebanon have had just one notable intersection in their history, the Japanese Red Army. For more information, see that article"? That's called content forking. TallNapoleon, aside from the fact that several Japan-X relations articles have been deleted, the fact is we still can't presume notability, especially when the one salient fact - embassies - is already recorded at Diplomatic missions of Japan & Lebanon. - Biruitorul Talk 17:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Mention trade numbers (I'm sure they're to be found somewhere, although I don't have time to do it myself) and the Red Army, plus maybe if Japanese citizens were evacuated or anything during the Lebanese Civil War or the Israeli-Lebanon war. That's enough for a stub. TallNapoleon (talk) 18:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * We have this for trade. The ~$5 million Lebanon exports to Japan is what we call a drop in the ocean, Japan having an economy of $4.2 trillion, and even in Lebanon's $44 billion economy, the ~$300 million in imports is just 0.7%. And yeah, there were 45 Japanese in Lebanon in 2006 (which could be noted on this pretty inane list, or on this one). But really, this just seems fairly trivial material we're trying to stick in here. - Biruitorul Talk 18:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete On the other side of the world, not enough independent and reliable sources with significant content about the diplomatic relations of these two countries. Organizationally, better to mention in "Foreign relations of Lebananon" and "Foreign relations of Japan articles" or sections if somehow they can be shown to have had extensive military, trade, or cultural ties. Seems highly doubtful. Not enough  here  to satisfy WP:N, so only directory-type listing. Edison (talk) 18:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I can't help but wonder why nobody has looked for sources yet. Look at all these sources that I have found regarding the relations between these two countries,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Thats 17 sources I found with a click of a button, 17 that could easily be used to justify relations. - Marcusmax ( speak ) 21:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of your articles above are trivial. some of the above articles relate to Japanese Red Army rather than bilateral relations. A foreign minister visiting another country happens all the time. This article says Lebanon would try to borrow money from Japan, don't less developed countries always try to borrow from the richest nations? And you're really scraping the barrel with this article, the only mention of Japan is the vehicle used in the bombing was stolen from Japan!!. how is that a basis of notable bilateral relations? LibStar (talk) 23:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * First off anytime two dignitaries meet each other that is called "relations", if two heads of state meet then it is "relations". The reason that meetings between two leaders happen all the time is because they are having meetings on there "diplomatic relations". If I am not mistaken that is what this article is about, it is about the relations between the two and minister visits are relations. In regards to the red army that is also relations in work, Lebanon did not have to extradite the prisoners to Japan but after many negotiations between the two countries an agreement was made. Once again that is diplomatic relations, not trivial whatsoever. The whole trivial argument is getting kind of old don't you think, 17 references showing that there are relations between the two is not trivial it is showing something is there. - Marcusmax ( speak ) 00:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * See WP:SYNTH - relations are what reliable sources say they are, not what you declare them to be. And they are certainly (except on the trivial level) not about foreign ministers' visits, which happen literally every week of every year, yet pass unnoticed on Wikipedia, except in this series of nonsense articles. - Biruitorul Talk 01:20, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 17 references? how does a truck stolen from Japan prove diplomatic relations? trying to borrow money which every less developed country tries to do? and this article from 1958 hardly proves notable bilateral relations. also, some of these references are applicable to Japanese Red Army article not here. LibStar (talk) 01:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * More Sources - In light of some of the complaints about my other perfectly fine sources I will throw in some more, My first source is an excerpt from an old BBC article the title reads Japanese envoy arrives in Lebanon for talks on detainees, bilateral relations the term bilateral relations sticks out because that is what this afd in question is about. Lets move on to the Red Army, in this article a senior Japanese Foreign Ministry Official is quoted saying, "We have information from reliable sources, and we know that the possibility (of the arrests) is very high. Having come so far, it is distressing to be told that there are no Japanese," so the government of Japan contacted Lebanon (obvious relations) and were distressed by what they were told. And finally this New York Times article gives a nice run down on the issues between Japan and Lebanon during the crisis. - Marcusmax ( speak ) 02:11, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.  —Fg2 (talk) 09:47, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Dozens of sources for this one. That opposite ends of the world is a guarantee or even presumption of non-notability, was outdated a good while ago. DGG (talk) 09:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge We already have articles on the Foreign relations of Japan and the Foreign relations of Lebanon. There's no reason to scatter things further and split things into three articles instead of 2. Any additional relations found should go into an existing article, not a new one. - Mgm|(talk) 10:10, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Question: For those who support merge, which article should the redirect point to? TallNapoleon (talk) 10:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Foreign relations of Lebanon - Japan's impact on Lebanon, though small, is larger than Lebanon's impact on Japan. - Biruitorul Talk 02:12, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per numerous sources. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 01:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge Insufficiently notable for its own article. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 11:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * How so, independent sources establish notability. - Marcusmax ( speak ) 22:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * NEW EVENTS HAVE MADE THESE AFDs IRRELEVANT We could really use some help with Foreign relations of Argentina by country, the first of many comprimise merges. Eventually these articles will be merged into the "diplomacy of..." articles. Lets all work together to merge these articles instead of arguing about them. So much energy has been wasted in these arguments, which could be used on merging these stub articles onto one page. I strongly encourage the nominator to withdraw the AFD nomination. Thanks. Ikip (talk) 16:35, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete this unsourced stub of no established notability and none establishable by me since i fail to find any reliable sources that discuss this relationship in the depth to meet any of our notability guidelines. An additional list of non-notable unsourced content doesn't obviate the need to get rid of the unsourced, non-notable content at hand.Bali ultimate (talk) 18:40, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I clicked, read and analysed every single one of the sources provided above. There is evidence of some relationship, but nothing of significance. It just so happens Japan has an interest in Middle East peace, which means it has to interact with all countries concerned. These relations are not notable in their own right- perhaps we could have an article for "Japan- Middle East relations" though I think the material is probably better documented elsewhere. HJMitchell    You rang?  00:51, 13 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.