Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philippines–Ukraine 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. postdlf (talk) 04:32, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Philippines–Ukraine relations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:GNG. this article hinges on 2 primary sources. One of them merely compares there is no resident ambassador. The other is a copy about trade. The relations need third party sources. LibStar (talk) 11:13, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - I do realize that this article has not established notability. There are aren't any other sources that I can find.--Zuanzuanfuwa (talk) 06:44, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I've added quite a few sources. Most are small, but a few were in depth.  This is over the line.  --99of9 (talk) 22:24, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar   &middot;   &middot;  17:26, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Meets WP:N, per sources now within the article. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:36, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep 990f9 did a good job of updating the information and bringing the article to an acceptable level.  Calidum Sistere   22:16, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep 99of9 did a good job finding reliable sources; as there appears to be sufficient reliable sources that give significant coverage to the subject of the article, the subject appears to meet WP:GNG.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:12, 25 June 2013 (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.