Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kosovo–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. Cirt (talk) 00:34, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Kosovo–New Zealand relations

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

any relevant information should be in International recognition of Kosovo. this topic does not deserve its own standalone article. there is no other diplomatic relations except recognition, NZ has no peacekeepers in Kosovo? LibStar (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Should be under a single country name -- the combination and permutation usage is egregious. LibStar is correct. Collect (talk) 02:06, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think you quite grasp the reason for the nomination. "Foo – Bar relations" (with spaces, admittedly) is the standard way of titling these articles - there is nothing "egregious" about it. See all the entries in, for instance. The problem here though is that there's nothing to say; that is the reason why this should be merged and redirected International recognition of Kosovo, with further smerging of anything usefuyl into Foreign relations of New Zealand and Foreign relations of Kosovo. Grutness...wha?  05:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge if relevant information. Nothing to see here. Move along. JakeZ (talk) 08:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Merely recognising a country's independence (which is virtually all that there is here) doesn't make a relationship notable. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) | (talk to me) | (What I've done)  10:37, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. I think it's fair to say that the consensus earlier this year was that we no longer want stubs for "nation 1 and nation 2 relations", and that if the only thing to write about is embassies, visits and diplomatic recognition, that's information that goes in the "Foreign relations of..." articles.   Although this is a new article from a long-established user, rather than part of a Groubani shipload of stubs of random pairings, there's nothing here that can't be kept in other articles.  I don't see redirect or merge as a solution for this type of article, because there are several different pages and only one redirect target. Mandsford (talk) 16:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kosovo-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'm the originator of this article. The rationale is that, given the formatting of International recognition of Kosovo, information that was listed regarding New Zealand when it hadn't recognized Kosovo wound up getting excised when it did.  While it's a stub presently, I believed that the subject matter was notable because NZ was (a) largely out-of-step from other western countries in its response to the Kosovo situation, and (b) provides a potentially-unique example in international relations of state trying to articulate a fence-sitting response to an independence declaration.  Admittedly, the article will require expansion to fully meet those goals. The Tom (talk) 02:18, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Mandsford. Buckshot06 (talk) 20:12, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete there is nothing particularly notable about these "relations" --Tocino 01:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and Mandsford. Glass  Cobra  22:53, 25 November 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.