Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international prime ministerial trips made by Imran Khan


 * 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. SpinningSpark 21:46, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

List of international prime ministerial trips made by Imran Khan

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Long list of items that are not in themselves notable. Alternately, redirect to Imran Khan  Pepper Beast    (talk)  00:39, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep We have a long-standing consensus that international visits by heads of government are encyclopaedic; see for example List of international prime ministerial trips made by Narendra Modi or List of international trips made by Angela Merkel. Mccapra (talk) 03:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:44, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:45, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:45, 24 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Category:Diplomatic visits by heads of government Category:Lists of diplomatic trips All of these types of list are perfectly valid. They are significant historical events with coverage in both nations.   D r e a m Focus  19:48, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: lists of international trips by heads of governments are valid and a notable. Mottezen (talk) 19:51, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per my previous arguments at a similar place: this is a WP:NOTNEWS/WP:INDISCRIMINATE collection of WP:RUNOFTHEMILL events (yes, heads of state/government make lots of international visits. Most of these are just routine diplomatic niceties, not any more historically important or noteworthy than the Queen of England's farts; and the few ones that are actually encyclopedically notable have their own articles). The keep arguments essentially sum up to an unsupported assertion of notability (worthless) and WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS: I contend that most of these lists should probably be deleted too, for the same reasons, and additionally that many of them also outright fail to WP:V, although that doesn't seem to apply here. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:16, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, per previous precedents, lists of international trips made by heads of government are notable.Jackattack1597 (talk) 10:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Unless you can provide some backing in policy, and evidence of it, that previous precedent is not a valid argument. All those previous AfDs (which unhelpfully I can't check, since you provide no substantiation) could be wrong, especially since this so glaringly fails WP:NOT. In short, your argument is a very poor appeal to tradition RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:49, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per Mccapra.4meter4 (talk) 23:34, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You do not address the concerns I have raised about Jackattack's comment, which is essentially the same as Mccapra's. It's an obvious example of a bad WP:PERX argument. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure. The international trips made by heads of state always receive significant independent coverage in media of both the nation being visited and the home nation of the head of state (sometimes in international press as well). Clearly a proper WP:BEFORE was not done, because there is a snowball's chance in hell of this failing WP:SIGCOV. Use WP:COMMONSENSE. Further, the influence on diplomatic relations by a head of state makes these international visits automatically notable for their impact on international affairs. The application of WP:INDISCRIMINATE in these type of articles is frankly a poorly realized argument. 4meter4 (talk) 01:36, 3 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, and every football game played in the top tiers of European football likely gets a whole lot of coverage too. Doesn't mean that we need to include it in an encyclopedia. Most state visits are routine and unremarkable, and coverage of each individual one is ephemeral, at best, while actual notability requires sustained coverage, and no, notability is not automatic, it requires verifiable evidence. In light of this last bit, your appeal to common sense is unconvincing. The topic as a whole is more likely than not an original compilation which cannot be verified as being either accurate and complete, due to it failing WP:LISTN. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:59, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Activities of heads of state on international affairs have far reaching consequences globally, and your attempt to trivialize them through a false comparison to sports (which are inherently trivial) is an informal fallacy.4meter4 (talk) 16:58, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * How is it a false comparison? Both of these types of events get coverage in newspapers, at the time they happen; but that's about it; and Wikipedia is not a newspaper, so we need to take a more distanced look. The vast majority of international visits do not have "far reaching consequences" (since you seem to think you're so well versed in the subject, can you give one recent example of such a "far reaching consequences" visit?), and you thinking that WP:ITSIMPORTANT does not mean it is. Nor does your comment address the inherent reliability/completeness and verifiability issue of these lists: if Wikipedia is the only website to host such a list, it unambiguously fails WP:LISTN and is almost WP:OR by definition and cannot be trusted to be accurate or to provide useful information to our readers. And the added issue of WP:RECENTISM, since what might seem important today based on lots of news coverage might really just be an unimportant footnote. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:25, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I think you are minimizing the position of a head of government in that analysis beyond was is reasonable/sensible, and under valuing how the actions of a head of state visit impact government relations, politics, economics, legislation, war, etc. Sports teams are entertainment and don't mean much outside of their own little corner of entertainment. Heads of state visits build relationships between governments which influence a wide spectrum of issues such as foreign policy making, trade deals, political allies in international conflict, etc. Heads of state visits aren't vacations, they have agendas with real world consequences that are non-trivial.4meter4 (talk) 17:46, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Even if I ignore the repeated WP:ITSIMPORTANT, how does that justify having a list of them? Lots of things can be (occasionally) individually significant without requiring that we compile an original and unverified list of them. And Khan isn't even head of state, he's head of government. Get your facts right. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:49, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The same applies for heads of government; arguing semantics is not helpful. This brings me back to WP:BEFORE. Has that actually been done? It's all well and good to cry that this is an unsourced list, but we do have a supplemental guideline of competent searching before a deletion nomination, and frankly I don't think its likely that this topic would be difficult to locate RS for. Nor do I think that this is an odd cross categorization that would fail WP:NLIST.4meter4 (talk) 18:01, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * If you think that is the case, instead of accusing me of being incompetent, it would be far easier and much more convincing for you to find a reliable source which discusses this topic and provides an accurate listing so that the information can be verifiable. LISTN is the same standard as GNG, but applied to lists: ie, there must be multiple independent reliable sources which significantly cover the list topic and not just individual elements of it. That would also be trivially met if you could find such sources. You haven't, ergo, I'm not convinced RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 19:01, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not accusing you of incompetency. I'm accusing PepperBeast of not doing a WP:BEFORE. However, I would like to know if you even bothered to search for sources at all (because you are usually competent, so my guess is that you didn't put in time and effort to seriously look for evidence). If you are going to make a claim that lack of sources is an issue, you have the responsibility to verify that sources don't exist and actually look for them before making that argument. 4meter4 (talk) 19:13, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the misunderstanding (although, whether directed at the nom or anybody, such comments ought to be avoided), then. The rest of my argument still stands. As I kind of implied, coverage of routine  individual trips is easy to come by, but I haven't found the kind of coverage needed for LISTN, nor have I found a full listing of these trips other than on WP mirrors. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  19:21, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I get that. However, individual entries in a list don't have to pass GNG. The topic as a whole does, which is supported by the repeated coverage of the subject's trips within media. So I am not really seeing how you can claim there is SIGCOV issue with the topic of the list because of the WP:SUSTAINED coverage of trips being covered in the press (meaning that as a set they are notable to be covered in a list but not necessarily have an individual article on every trip). This is one of the benefits of list articles.4meter4 (talk) 19:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Further contributions should be made with reference to policy/guidelines as against simple assertions of notability (or lack).
 * Comment Category:Diplomatic visits by heads of government contains dozens of articles. Are they all non notable, or just some of them? Or just this one? Mccapra (talk) 16:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Answer That's still WP:OSE. Probably a fair bit of them (likely all of the "Lists of international visits by X") need to be deleted. This is likely the same situation as with Category:Lists of living people, which recently had a fair few articles deleted. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:41, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - as his trips aren't overly noteworthy. GoodDay (talk) 18:53, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep The international trips made by heads of government always are significant. -GorgonaJS (talk) 11:25, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:46, 4 October 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * keep Prime ministerial trips almost always generate significant coverage. LashandaWilhelm (talk) 00:47, 7 October 2021 (UTC) — LashandaWilhelm (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  14:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, as the topic is notable, and generates significant coverageJackattack1597 (talk) 21:29, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * To prove a point by making a parody: "Delete, because the topic is not-notable and does not generate any coverage". In addition to providing nothing to support your assertion, the argument that this fails WP:NOT (by being a list of routine, run-of-the-mill events) is still unaddressed. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 21:55, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Duplicate vote struck RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep evidently the trips have gathered coverage. This verifiable information should be kept per WP:PRESERVE, and a list is a tidy way to contain it. The topic feels en encyclopedic enough to me, what is WP:MILL is subjective anyway and depends on the interests of the reader. NemesisAT (talk) 22:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * And the encyclopedic ones can be covered at Imran Khan (where they already are, go figure!) without requiring a trivial listing of them (WP:NOPAGE) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:11, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * At over 200,000 bytes long, I think it would be best to keep separate articles rather than add more content to an already very lengthy article. NemesisAT (talk) 22:17, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You're missing "where they already are". In any case, the WP:SPLIT issues of another article (Foreign policy of Imran Khan would be a valid article, if that is what you are asking) are not a reason to keep this. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:34, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep a very similar discussion was had at Articles for deletion/List of international prime ministerial trips made by Sheikh Hasina. It is clear that the status quo is for articles like this to exist, and the "appeal to tradition" is valid; after all, we write our own rules here, and we do so based on tradition.  If you (presumably RandomCanadian as the only editor who appears offended by a keep) don't like it, file an RFC. User:力 (power~enwiki,  π,  ν ) 23:38, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Well obviously I'm not the only editor (I am not the nominator). As for your keep vote, it is indeed a pure appeal to tradition which does not substantiate why the supposed tradition is correct (nor address the reasons why it is incorrect). As for the venue; well, deletions are usually decided at AfD... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:44, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep There is ample coverage of his foreign trips. The argument to merge material into Imran Khan isn't a valid one at all. If anything, that article should be further split considering length-related issues.  Mar4d  ( talk ) 14:17, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * This article should not be deleted at all. It is very informative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.144.249 (talk) 09:09, 24 October 2021 (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.