Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Japan–Trinidad and Tobago 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   keep.  Sandstein  04:24, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Japan–Trinidad and Tobago relations

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

this fails WP:GNG. not much more to this relationship than a Japanese embassy in Trinidad, and Trinidad sells LNG to Japan. there is a very small number of 32 Japanese living there. the relationship is not subject to significant third party coverage. those wanting to keep must provide actual sources not the embassy website. LibStar (talk) 07:44, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge - This article could be neatly summarized with a sentence or two in the Trinidad and Tobago and Japan articles.-- Stv Fett erly  (Edits)  13:24, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:50, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:50, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:50, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Leaning keep - The topic appears to meet WP:GNG, with coverage from reliable governmental and news sources:
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 13:29, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * the last 2 sources are not really third party I.e. Government websites, plus it's routine coverage of usual talking with ambassadors. LibStar (talk) 14:47, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 13:29, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * the last 2 sources are not really third party I.e. Government websites, plus it's routine coverage of usual talking with ambassadors. LibStar (talk) 14:47, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * the last 2 sources are not really third party I.e. Government websites, plus it's routine coverage of usual talking with ambassadors. LibStar (talk) 14:47, 20 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:36, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Sufficient sources to show notability. That;s enough of a reason for keeping.  DGG ( talk ) 04:59, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep This article has a potential for growth.--Hot cake syrup (talk) 14:59, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - yes, Japanese diplomats might be able to find Trinidad on a map, and the reverse is likely true as well. Yes, a low-ranking Japanese minister once went on a junket to a pretty Caribbean island. Yes, Japan has an ambassador there, and yes, Trinidadian state media reported when the old one left and the new one came in. But no, none of this in any way validates an article on what is patently a fictitious topic. Nowadays, most countries on earth have at least some minimal interaction, this pair being no exception. But minimal interaction does not translate into a notable bilateral relationship. For that, sources actually discussing relations between Japan and Trinidad would be necessary, and of course these don't exist, since the "topic" doesn't exist outside the minds of the handful of Wikipedia editors playing this silly game of "watch me do this". Let's quash this particular experiment. - Biruitorul Talk 17:38, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY. There are now enough material and citations to show some notability. Bearian (talk) 16:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG. Sources demonstrate a relationship and Trinidad and Tobago apparently serves as Japan's embassy for much of the Caribbean, which is an example of their relationship.--TM 22:30, 3 May 2012 (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.