Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Morocco–Serbia 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. Nja 247 09:06, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Morocco–Serbia relations

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

distinct lack of coverage of actual bilateral relations, most coverage is multilateral or sport. . I found this article but again the usual want to cooperate more type news. Serbian Foreign Ministry says close to nothing about relationship including listing no bilateral agreement whatsoever. LibStar (talk) 08:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete There doesn't seem to be enough significant relations for these two countries to have their own relations article together.-- The Legendary   Sky Attacker  09:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete; no contents beyond date of establishment. - Altenmann >t 15:28, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 16:03, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. And yet another random pairing of countries that don't display any real notability beyond the normal, pedestrian functions of government. Niteshift36 (talk) 17:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  —Cdogsimmons (talk) 16:08, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. And can't the normal, pedestrian functions of government be notable, and worthy of coverage in an encyclopedia? This isn't The National Enquirer or The Guinness Book of Records, requiring everything to be sensational or exceptional: it's an encyclopedia. Historians and political scientists write about the normal, pedestrian functions of government, so why shouldn't such things be included in a comprehensive, non-paper encyclopedia? Phil Bridger (talk) 18:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I won't say that th pedestrian functions of govt. could never be notable, but in this case, I don't see it. And I ddon't buy into the "we don't use paper" line of reasoning.... it is wrong-headed thinking. Whether we're using paper or bytes shouldn't be an issue or consideration. Non-notable is non-notable and this "relationship" is non-notable. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * the minimum criteria for inclusion in WP is WP:N. LibStar (talk) 23:47, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that pretty much says it all. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of the notable, not a journal of the mundane. Drawn Some (talk) 23:59, 5 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Surprisingly, the topic of this article, Morocco-Serbia relations, fails to meet the requirements of WP:NOTE. Drawn Some (talk) 23:59, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per everyone above. Fails WP:GNG. Yilloslime T C  18:19, 8 July 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.