Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of naval collaboration treaties signed by the Ottoman Empire


 * 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. bd2412 T 03:00, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

List of naval collaboration treaties signed by the Ottoman Empire

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unclear scope; "naval collaboration" is a novel and unclear term for a treaty, and many of these treaties are peace treaties with at most some commercial or navigation clauses. The article claims that "These treaties were instrumental to establishment of the Ottoman Naval force.", but the Ottoman navy was established by the 15th century, and most of these treaties are later than that. All in all, this appears to be textbook WP:OR. Constantine  ✍  11:53, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:13, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. There is no such thing (so far as I can tell) called a naval collaboration treaty. There are treaties and there is naval collaboration, so the term itself is OR. Most of this list are red links (if they were linked at all) and unsourced. No one is writing about the subject so a list of NN treaties doesn't make sense. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 19:37, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep i think the purpose of creating this article is developing Wikipedia. but sources should improve . so i think it not be deleted Lifeisstudyinghard (talk) 14:30, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I am deeply suspicious of User:Lifeisstudyinghard, a new account behaving oddly, very oddly, has made a series of slapdash kVotes at a random series of AfDs, including this one, . and then this purposeful feeling edit at Articles for deletion/Ibrahim Al-Haidos (2nd nomination).E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:59, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete as pure OR, as detailed by Chris Troutman  and Constantine.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:59, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Rename to Naval treaties of the Ottoman Empire. In WP, OR tends to imply that the editor is guilty of invention.  I am prepared to trust that the author has got sources, which are indeed cited, though with syntax errors.  There will also be treaties relating to land borders and commercial treaties.  My guess is that "naval collaboration" refers to an alliance against a common enemy.  It may be that the full length articles will not be about one treaty but successive treaties or international relations generally between Ottoman Empire and respectively Venice, Ragusa, Great Britain, etc.  Please note for England/GB/UK that there is no need to split these according to the title of the state as international relations come under the Royal Prerogative, and there was only one lot of relations between the English/British crown and a foreign state.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:18, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * OR does not refer to the treaties themselves, but to the topic at hand, and the specific subset of treaties included therein by some unspecified criteria as related to it. As someone who is actually somewhat knowledgeable about Ottoman history, apart possibly from the treaties with France, most of them definitely do not have the sense of "an alliance against a common enemy", and again, most of them are not primarily naval treaties, merely treaties that include clauses on navigation and commerce. Constantine  ✍  16:57, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. This might be worthy of inclusion in the Ottoman Navy's article, somehow, but not as a stand-alone list. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:15, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom and Bushranger. Parsecboy (talk) 20:53, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per Chris Troutman. Or rename it. L3X1 (distænt write)  02:12, 28 October 2017 (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.